The
History of Protestantism |
Chapter 1 | HENRY II AND PARTIES IN
FRANCE. Francis I—His Last Illness—Waldensian Settlement in Provence— Fertility and Beauty—Massacre—Remorse of the King — His Death— Lying in State—Henry II—Parties at Court—The Constable de Montmorency— Thc Guises—Diana of Poictiers—Marshal de St. Andre—Catherine de Medici. |
Chapter 2 | HENRY II AND HIS
PERSECUTIONS. Bigotry of Henry II—Persecution—The Tailor and Diana of Poictiers— The Tailor Burned—The King Witnesses his Execution—Horror of the King—Martyrdoms—Progress of the Truth—Bishop of Macon—The Gag — First Protestator Congregation—Attempt to Introduce the Inquisition—National Disasters—Princes and Nobles become Protestants —A Mercuriale—Arrest of Du Bourg—A Tournament—The King Killed —Strange Rumors. |
Chapter 3 | FIRST NATIONAL SYNOD OF THE FRENCH
PROTESTANT CHURCH. Early Assemblies of French Protestants—Colportage—Holy Lives—The Planting of Churches throughout France—Play at La Rochelle—First National Synod—Confession of Faith of the French Church— Constitution and Government—Gradation of Courts - Order and Liberty - Piety Flourishes. |
Chapter 4 | A GALLERY OF PORTRAITS. National Decadence—Francis II—Scenes Shift at Court—The Guises and the Queen-mother—Anthony de Bourbon—His Paltry Character— Prince of Conde—His Accomplishments—Admiral Coilgny—His Conversion— Embraces the Reformed Faith—His Daily Life—Great Services—Jeanne d'Albret, Queen of Navarre—Greatness of her Character—Services to French Protestantism—Her Kingdom of Navarre—Edict Establishing the Reformed Worship in it—Her Cede— Her Fame. |
Chapter 5 | THE GUISES, AND THE INSURRECTION OF
AMBOISE. Francis II—Pupilage of the King—The Guises Masters of France—Their Tool, the Mob—Chambres Ardentes —Wrecking —Odious Slanders — Confiscation of Huguenot Estates—Retribution— Conspiracy of Amboise—Its Failure—Executions — Tragedies on the Loire — Carrier of Nantes Renews these Tragedies in 1790—Progress of Protestantism— Condemnation of Conde—Preparations for his Execution —Abjuration Test—Death of Francis II—His Funeral. |
Chapter 6 | CHARLES IX—THE TRIUMVIRATE—COLLOQUY AT
POISSY. Mary Stuart—Charles IX—Catherine de Medici Regent—Meeting of States-General—Chancellor de l'Hopital on Toleration—Speeches of the Deputies—The Church's Advocate calls for the Sword—Sermons at Fontainebleau—The Triumvirate—Debt of France—Colloquy at Poissy—Roman Members—Protestant Deputies—Beza—His Appearance—Points of Difference—Commotion in the Conference— Cardinal of Lorraine's Oration—End of Colloquy—Lesson—Impulse to Protestantism— Preaching of Pierre Viret—Dogmas and their Symbols—Huguenot Iconoclasts. |
Chapter 7 | MASSACRE AT VASSY AND COMMENCEMENT OF THE
CIVIL WARS. Spring-time of French Protestantism—Edict of January—Toleration of Public Worship—Displeasure of the Romanists—Extermination—The Duke of Guise—Collects an Army—Massacres the Protestants of Vassy —The Duke and the Bible — He Enters Paris in Triumph—His Sword Supreme—Shall the Protestants take up Arms?—Their Justification— Massacres—Frightful State of France—More Persecuting Edicts— Charlotte Laval—Coligny sets out for the Wars. |
Chapter 8 | COMMENCEHENT OF THE HUGUENOT
WARS. Conde Seizes Orleans–His Compatriot Chiefs – Prince of Porcian– Rochefoucault–Rohan-Grammont–Montgomery–Soubise–St. Phale –La Mothe–Genlis–Marvellous Spread of the Reformed Faith–The Popish Party–Strength of Protestantism in France – Question of the Civil Wars – Justification of the Huguenots–Finance–Foreign Allies. |
Chapter 9 | THE FIRST HUGUENOT WAR, AND DEATH OF THE
DUKE OF GUISE. Final Overtures–Rejection–The Two Standards–Division of France– Orleans the Huguenot Headquarters–Conde the Leader–Coligny– The Two Armies Meet–Catherine's Policy–No Battle–Rouen Besieged–Picture of the Two Camps–Fall of Rouen– Miseries – Death of the King of Navarre–Battle of Dreux – Duke of Guise sole Dictator–Conde a Prisoner–Orleans Besieged–The Inhabitants to be put to the Sword–The Duke of Guise Assassinated– Catherine de Medici Supreme–Pacification of Amboise. |
Chapter 10 | CATHERINE DE MEDICI AND HER SON, CHARLES
IX– CONFERENCE AT BAYONNE–THE ST. BARTHOLOMEW MASSACRE PLOTTED. The Peace Satisfactory to Neither Party–Catherine de Medici comes to the Front–The Dance of Death at the Louvre–What will Catherine's Policy be–the Sword or the Olive-branch?–Charles IX–His Training–A Royal Progress–Iconoclast Outrages–Indignation of Charles IX–The Envoys of the Duke of Savoy and the Pope– Bayonne–Its Chateau–Nocturnal Interviews between Catherine de Medici and the Duke of Alva–Agreed to Exterminate the Protestants of France and England–Testimony of Davila–of Tavannes–of Maimbourg–Plot to be Executed at Moulins, 1566–Postponed. |
Chapter 11 | SECOND AND THIRD HUGUENOT
WARS. Peace of Longjumeau–Second Huguenot War–Its One Battle–A Peace which is not Peace – Third Huguenot War–Conspiracy–An Incident –Protestant Chiefs at La Rochelle–Joined by the Queen of Navarre and the Prince of Bearn–Battle of Jarnac–Death of the Prince of Conde– Heroism of Jeanne d'Albret–Disaster at Montcontour – A Dark Night –Misfortunes of Coligny–His Sublimity of Soul. |
Chapter 12 | SYNOD OF LA ROCHELLE. Success as Judged by Man and by God—Coligny's Magnanimous Counsels—A New Huguenot Army—Dismay of the Court—Peace of St. Germain-en-Laye—Terms of Treaty—Perfidiousness—Religion on the Battle-field—Synod of La Rochelle — Numbers and Rank of its Members —It Ratifies the Doctrine and Constitution of the French Church as Settled at its First Synod. |
Chapter 13 | THE PROMOTERS OF THE ST. BARTHOLOMEW
MASSACRE. Theocracy and the Punishment of Heresy—The League—Philip II— Urges Massacre—Position of Catherine de Medici—Hopelessness of Subduing the Huguenots on the Battle-field — Pius V — His Austerities— Fanaticism—Becomes Chief Inquisitor—His Habits as Pope—His Death —Correspondence of Pius V with Charles IX and Catherine de Medici— Massacre distinctly Outlined by the Pope. |
Chapter 14 | NEGOTIATIONS OF THE COURT WITH THE
HUGUENOTS. Dissimulation on a Grand Scale — Proposed Expedition to Flanders— The Prince of Orange to be Assisted—The Proposal brings Coligny to Court—The King's Reception of him — Proposed Marriage of the King's Sister with the King of Navarre—Jeanne d'Albret comes to Court — Her Sudden Death—Picture of the French Court—Interview between Charles IX and the Papal Legate—The King's Pledge—His Doublings. |
Chapter 15 | THE MARRIAGE, AND PREPARATIONS FOR THE
MASSACRE. Auguries—The King of Navarre and his Companions arrive in Paris— The Marriage—The Rejoicings—Character of Pius V—The Admiral Shot— The King and Court Visit him—Behavior of the King—Davila on the Plot —The City-gates Closed—Troops introduced into Paris—The Huguenot Quarter Surrounded—Charles IX Hesitates—Interview between him and his Mother—Shall Navarre and Conde be Massacred? |
Chapter 16 | THE MASSACRE OF ST.
BARTHOLOMEW. Final Arrangements—The Tocsin—The First Pistol-shot—Murder of Coligny—His Last Moments—Massacre throughout Paris—Butchery at the Louvre—Sunrise, and what it Revealed—Charles IX Fires on his Subjects—An Arquebus—The Massacres Extend throughout France— Numbers of the Slain—Variously Computed—Charles IX Excusing Accuses himself—Reception of the News in Flanders—in England — in Scotland—Arrival of the Escaped at Geneva—Rejoicings at Rome—The Three Frescoes — The St. Bartholomew Medal. |
Chapter 17 | RESURRECTION OF HUGUENOTISM—DEATH OF
CHARLES IX. After the Storm — Revival—Siege of Sancerre—Horrors—Bravery of the Citizens—The Siege Raised—La Rochelle—The Capital of French Protestantism — Its Prosperous Condition—Its Siege—Brave Defense— The Besiegers Compelled to Retire—A Year after St. Bartholomew—Has Coligny Risen from the Dead?—First Anniversary of the St. Bartholomew — The Huguenots Reappear at Court—New Demands— Mortification of the Court—A Politico-Ecclesiastical Confederation formed by the Huguenots—The Tiers Parti— Illness of Charles IX. — Hie Sweat cf Blood — Remorse — His Huguenot Nurse — His Death. |
Chapter 18 | NEW PERSECUTIONS—REIGN AND DEATH OF HENRY
III. Henry III—A Sensualist and Tyrant—Persecuting Edict—Henry of Navarre—His Character—The Protestants Recover their Rights—The League—War—Henry III Joins the League—Gallantry of "Henry of the White Plume"—Dissension between Henry III and the Duke of Guise— Murder of Guise—Murder of the Cardinal of Lorraine—Henry III and Henry of Navarre Unite their Arms—March on Paris—Henry III Assassinated—Death of Catherine de Medici. |
Chapter 19 | HENRY IV AND THE EDICT OF
NANTES. Henry IV—Birth and Rearing—Assumes the Crown—Has to Fight for the Kingdom—Victory at Dieppe—Victory at Ivry—Henry's Vacillation— His Double Policy—Wrongs of the Huguenots—Henry turns towards Rome—Sully and Duplessis—Their Different Counsel— Henry's Abjuration—Protestant Organization—The Edict of Nantes— Peace— Henry as a Statesman—His Foreign Policy — Proposed Campaign against Austria—His Forebodings—His Assassination—His Character. |
BOOK SEVENTEENTH
PROTESTANTISM IN FRANCE FROM DEATH OF
FRANCIS I (1547) TO EDICT OF NANTES (1598).
CHAPTER 1
Back to
Top
HENRY II AND PARTIES IN
FRANCE.
Francis I—His Last Illness—Waldensian Settlement in Provence—
Fertility and Beauty—Massacre—Remorse of the King — His Death— Lying in
State—Henry II—Parties at Court—The Constable de Montmorency— Thc Guises—Diana
of Poictiers—Marshal de St. Andre—Catherine de Medici.
We have rapidly traced the line of Waldensian story
from those early ages when the assembled barbes are seen keeping watch around
their lamp in the Pra del Tor, with the silent silvery peaks looking down upon
them, to those recent days when the Vaudois carried that lamp to Rome and set it
in the city of Pius IX. Our desire to pursue their conflicts and martyrdoms till
their grand issues to Italy and the world had been reached has carried us into
modern times. We shall return, and place ourselves once more in the age of
Francis I.
We resume our history at the death-bed of that monarch.
Francis died March 31st, 1547, at the age of fifty-two, "of that shameful
distemper," says the Abbe Millot, "which is brought on by debauchery, and which
had been imported with the gold of America."[1] The character of this
sovereign was adorned by some fine qualities, but his reign was disgraced by
many great errors. It is impossible to withhold from him the praise of a
generous disposition, a cultivated taste, and a chivalrous bearing; but it is
equally impossible to vindicate him from the charge of rashness in his
enterprises, negligence in his affairs, fickleness in his conduct, and excess in
his pleasures. He lavished his patronage upon the scholars of the Renaissance,
but he had nothing but stakes wherewith to reward the disciples of
Protestantism. He built Fontainebleau, and began the Louvre. And now, after all
his great projects for adorning his court with learned men, embellishing his
capital with gorgeous fabrics, and strengthening his throne by political
alliances, there remains to him only "darkness and the worm." Let us enter the
royal closet, and mark the setting of that sun which had shed such a brilliance
during his course. Around the bed upon which Francis I lies dying is gathered a
clamorous crowd of priests, courtiers, and courtesans,[2] who watch his last moments
with decent but impatient respect, ready, the instant he has breathed his last,
to turn round and bow the knee to the rising sun. Let us press through the
throng and observe the monarch. His face is haggard. He groans deeply, as if he
were suffering in soul. His starts are sudden and violent. There flits at times
across his face a dark shadow, as if some horrible sight, afflicting him with
unutterable woe, were disclosed to him; and a quick tremor at these moments runs
through all his frame. He calls his attendants about him and, mustering all the
strength left him, he protests that it is not he who is to blame, inasmuch as
his orders were exceeded. What orders? we ask; and what deed is it, the memory
of which so burdens and terrifies the dying monarch?
We must leave the
couch of Francis while we narrate one of the greatest of the crimes that
blackened his reign. The scene of the tragedy which projected such dismal
shadows around the death-bed of the king was laid in Provence. In ancient times
Provence was comparatively a desert. Its somewhat infertile soil was but thinly
peopled, and but indifferently tilled and planted. It lay strewn all over with
great boulders, as if here the giants had warred, or some volcanic explosion had
rained a shower of stones upon it. The Vaudois who inhabited the high-lying
valleys of the Pied-montese Alps, cast their eyes upon this more happily
situated region, and began to desire it as a residence. Here, said they, is a
fine champaign country, waiting for occupants; let us go over and possess it.
They crossed the mountains, they cleared the land of rocks, they sowed it with
wheat, they planted it with the vine, and soon there was seen a smiling garden,
where before a desert of swamps, and great stones, and wild herbage had spread
out its neglected bosom to be baked by the summer's sun, and frozen by the
winter's winds. "An estate which before their establishment hardly paid four
crowns as rental, now produced from three to four hundred."[3] The successive generations
of these settlers flourished here during a period of three hundred years,
protected by their landlords, whose revenues they had prodigiously enriched,
loved by their neighbors, and loyal to their king.
When the Reformation
arose, this people sent delegates—as we have related in the previous book—to
visit the Churches of Switzerland and Germany, and ascertain how far they agreed
with, and how far they differed from themselves. The report brought back by the
delegates satisfied them that the Vaudois faith and the Protestant doctrine were
the same; that both had been drawn from the one infallible fountain of truth;
and that, in short, the Protestants were Vaudois, and the Vaudois were
Protestants. This was enough. The priests, who so anxiously guarded their
territory against the entrance of Lutheranism, saw with astonishment and
indignation a powerful body of Protestants already in possession. They resolved
that the heresy should be swept from off the soil of France as speedily as it
had arisen. On the 18th of November, 1540, the Parliament of Aix passed an arret
to the following effect: — "Seventeen inhabitants of Merindol shall be burnt to
death" (they were all the heads of families in that place); "their wives,
children, relatives, and families shall be brought to trial, and if they cannot
be laid. hold on, they shall be banished the kingdom for life. The houses in
Merindol shall be burned and razed to the ground, the woods cut down, the
fruit-trees torn up, and the place rendered uninhabitable, so that none may be
built there."[4]
The president of
the Parliament of Aix, a humane man, had influence with the king to stay the
execution of this horrible sentence. But in 1545 he was succeeded by Baron
d'Oppede, a cruel, intolerant, bloodthirsty man, and entirely at the devotion of
Cardinal Tournon—a man, says Abbe Millot, "of greater zeal than humanity, who
principally enforced the execution of this barbarous arret."[5] Francis I offered them
pardon if within three months they should enter the pale of the Roman Church.
They disdained to buy their lives by apostacy; and now the sword, which had hung
for five years above their heads, fell with crushing force. A Romanist pen shall
tell the sequel: —
"Twenty-two towns or villages were burned or sacked,
with an inhumanity of which the history of the most barbarous people hardly
presents examples. The unfortunate inhabitants, surprised, during the night, and
pursued from rock to rock by the light of the fires which consumed their
dwellings, frequently escaped one snare only to fall into another; the pitiful
cries of the old men, the women, and the children, far from softening the hearts
of the soldiers, mad with rage like their leaders, only set them on following
the fugitives, and pointed out the places whither to direct their fury.
Voluntary surrender did not exempt the men from execution, nor the women from
excesses of brutality which made Nature bhsh. It was forbidden, under pain of
death, to afford them any refuge. At Cabrieres, one of the principal towns of
that canton, they murdered more than seven hundred men in cold blood; and the
women, who had remained in their houses, were shut up in a barn filled witth
straw, to which they set fire; those who attempted to escape by the window were
driven back by swords and pikes. Finally, according to the tenor of the
sentence, the houses were razed, the woods cut down, the fruit-trees pulled up,
and in a short time this country, so fertile and so populous, became
uncultivated and uninhabited."[6]
Thus did the red
sword and the blazing torch purge Provence. We cast our eyes over the purified
land, but, alas! we are unable to recognize it. Is this the land which but a few
days ago was golden with the yellow grain, and purple with the blushling grape;
at whose cottage doors played happy children; and from whose meadows and
mountain-sides, borne on the breeze, came the bleating of flocks and the lowing
of herds? Now, alas! its bosom is scarred and blackened by smouldering ruins,
its mountain torrents are tinged with blood, and its sky is thick with the black
smoke of its burning woods and cities.
We return to the closet of the
dying monarch. Francis is still protesting that the deed is not his, and that
too zealous executioners exceeded his orders. Nevertheless he cannot banish, we
say not from his memory, but from his very sight, the awful tragedy enacted on
the plains of Provence. Shrieks of horror, wailings of woe, and cries for help
seem to resound through his chamber. Have his ministers and courtiers no word of
comfort wherewith to assuage his terrors, and fortify him in the prospect of
that awful Bar to which he is hastening with the passing hours? They urged him
to sanction the crime, but they leave him to bear the burden of it alone. He
summons his son, who is so soon to mount his throne, to his bedside, and charges
him with his last breath to execute vengeance on those who had shed this
blood.[7] With this slight
reparation the unhappy king goes his dark road, the smoking and blood-sprinkled
Provence behind him, the great Judgment-seat before him.
Having breathed
his last, the king lay in state, preparatory to his being laid in the royal
vaults at St. Denis. Two of his sons who had pre-deceased him—Francis and
Charles—were kept unburied till now, and their corpses accompanied that of their
father to the grave. Of the king's lying-in-state, the following very curious
account is given us by Sleidan:—
"For some days his effigies, in most
rich apparel, with his crown, scepter, and other regal ornaments, lay upon a bed
of state, and at certain hours dinner and supper were served up before it, with
the very same solemnity as was commonly performed when he was alive. When the
regal ornaments were taken off, they clothed the effigies in mourning; and
eight-and-forty Mendicant friars were always present, who continually sung
masses and dirges for the soul departed. About the corpse were placed fourteen
great wax tapers, and over against it two altars, on which from daylight to noon
masses were said, besides what were said in an adjoining chapel, also full of
tapers and other lights. Four-and-twenty monks, with wax tapers in their hands,
were ranked about the hearse wherein the corpse was carried, and before it
marched fifty poor men in mourning, every one with a taper in his hand. Amongst
other nobles, there were eleven cardinals present."
Henry II now mounted
the throne of France. At the moment of his accession all seemed to promise a
continuance of that prosperity and splen-dor which had signalized the reign of
his father. The kingdom enjoyed peace, the finances were flourishing, the army
was brave and well-affected to the throne; and all men accepted these as
auguries of a prosperous reign. This, however, was but a brief gleam before the
black night. France had missed the true path. Henry had worn the crown for only
a short while when the clouds began to gather, and that night to descend which
is only now beginning to pass away from France. His father had early initiated
him into the secrets of governing, but Henry loved not business. The young king
sighed to get away from the council-chamber to the gay tournament, where mailed
and plumed warriors pursued, amid applauding spectators, the mimic game of war.
What good would this princedom do him if it brought him not pleasure? At his
court there lacked not persons, ambitious and supple, who studied to flatter his
vanity and gratify his humors. To lead the king was to govern France, and to
govern France was to grasp boundless riches and vast power. It was under this
feeble king that those factions arose, whose strivings so powerfully influenced
the fate of Protestantism in that great kingdom, and opened the door for so many
calamities to the nation. Four parties were now formed at court, and we must
pause here to describe them, otherwise much that is to follow would be scarcely
intelligible. In the passions and ambitions of these parties, we unveil the
springs of those civil wars which for more than a century deluged France with
blood.
At the head of the first party was Anne de Montmorency, High
Constable of France. Claiming descent from a family which had been one of the
first to be baptised into the Christian faith, he assumed the glorious title of
the First Christian and Premier Baron [8] of France. He possessed
great strength of will, and whatever end he proposed to himself he pursued,
without much caring whom he trod down in his way to it. He had the misfortune on
one occasion to give advice to Francis I which did not prosper, and this,
together with his head-strongness, made that monarch in his latter days banish
him from the court. When Francis was dying he summoned his son Henry to his
bedside, and earnestly counselled him never to recall Mont-morency, fearing that
the obstinacy and pride which even he had with difficulty repressed, the weaker
hands to which he was now bequeathing his crown [9] would be unequal to the
task of curbing.
No sooner had Henry assumed the reins of government than
he recalled the Constable. Montmorency's recall did not help to make him a
meeker man. He strode back to court with brow more elate, and an air more
befitting one who had come to possess a throne than to serve before it. The
Constable was beyond measure devout, as became the first Christian in France.
Never did he eat flesh on forbidden days; and never did morning dawn or evening
fall but his beads were duly told. It is true he sometimes stopped suddenly in
the middle of his chaplet to issue orders to his servants to hang up this or the
other Huguenot, or to set fire to the corn-field or plantation of some neighbor
of his who was his enemy; but that was the work of a minute only, and the
Constable was back again with freshened zeal to his Paternosters and his
Ave-Marias. It became a proverb, says Brantome, "God keep us from the
Constable's beads."[10] These singularities by no
means lessened his reputation for piety, for the age hardly placed acts of
religion and acts of mercy in the same category. Austere, sagacious, and
resolute, he constrained the awe if not the love of the king, and as a
consequence his heavy hand was felt in every part of the kingdom.
The
second party was that of the Guises. The dominancy of that family in France
marks one of the darkest eras of the nation. The House of Lorraine, from which
the Lords of Guise are descended, derived its original from Godfrey Bullen, King
of Jerusalem, and on the mother's side from a daughter of Charlemagme. Anthony,
flourishing in wealth and powerful in possessions, was Duke of Lorraine; Claude,
a younger brother, crossed the frontier in 1513, staff in hand, attended by but
one servant, to seek his fortunes in France. He ultimately became Duke of Guise.
This man had six sons, to all of whom wealth seemed to come at their wish.
Francis I, perceiving the ambition of these men, warned his son to keep them at
a distance.[11] But the young king,
despising the warning, recalled Francis de Lorraine as he had done the Constable
Montmorency, and the power of the Guises continued to grow, till at last they
became the scourge of the country in which they had firmly rooted themselves,
and the terror of the throne which they aspired to mount.
The two
brothers, Francis and Charles, stood at the head of the family, and figured at
the court. Franzis, now in the flower of his age, was sprightly and daring;
Charles was crafty, but timid; Laval says of him that he was "the cowardliest of
all men." The qualities common to both brothers, and possessed by each in
inordinate degree, were cruelty and ambition. Rivals they never could. become,
for though their ambitions were the same, their spheres lay apart, Francis
having chosen the profession of arms, and Charles the Church. This division of
pursuits doubled their strength, for what the craft of the one plotted, the
sword of the other executed. They were the acknowledged heads of the Roman
Catholic party. "But for the Guises," says Mezeray, "the new religion would
perhaps have become dominant in France."
The third party at the court of
France was that of Diana of Poictiers. This woman was the daughter of John of
Poicters, Lord of St. Valier, and had been the wife of Seneschal of Normandy.
She was twenty years older than the king, but this disparity of age did not
hinder her from becoming the mistress of his heart. The populace could not
account for the king's affection for her, save by ascribing it to the philtres
which she made him drink. A more likely cause was her brilliant wit and
sprightly manners, added to her beauty, once dazzling, and not yet wholly faded.
But her greed was enormous. The people cursed her as the cause of the taxes that
were grinding them into poverty; the nobility hated her for her insulting airs;
but access there was none to the king, save through the good graces of Diana of
Poictiers, whom the king created Duchess of Valentinois. The title by
embellishing made only the more conspicuous the infamy of her relation to the
man who had bestowed it. The Constable on the one side, and the Guises on the
other, sought to buttress their own power by paying court to Diana.[12] To such a woman the holy
doctrines of Protestantism could not be other than offensive; in truth, she very
thoroughly hated all of the religion, and much of the righteous blood shed in
the reign of Henry II is to be laid at the door of the lewd, greedy, and cruel
Diana of Poictiers.
The fourth and least powerful faction was that of the
Marshal de St. Andre. He was as brave and valiant as he was witty and polite;
but he was drowned in debt. Though a soldier he raised himself not by his valor,
but by court intrigues; "under a specious pretense for the king's service he hid
a boundless ambition, and an unruly avarice," said his Romanist friends, "and
was more eager after the forfeited estates than after the overthrow of the
rebels and Huguenots."[13] Neither court nor country
was likely to be quiet in which such a man figured.
To these four parties
we may add a fifth, that of Catherine de Medici, the wife of Henry. Of deeper
passions but greater self-control than many of those around her, Catherine
meanwhile was "biding her time." There were powers in this woman which had not
yet disclosed themselves, perhaps not even to herself; but when her husband
died, and the mistress no longer divided with the wife the ascendency over the
royal mind, then the hour of revelation came, and it was seen what consummate
guile, what lust of power, what love of blood and revenge had slumbered in her
dark Italian soul. As one after another of her imbecile sons, each more imbecile
than he who had preceded him—mounted the throne, the mother stood up in a lofty
and yet loftier measure of truculence and ambition. As yet, however, her cue was
not to form a party of her own, but to maintain the poise among the other
factions, that by weakening all of them she might strengthen
herself.
Such were the parties that divided the court of Henry II. Thrice
miserable monarch! without one man of real honor and sterling patriotism in whom
to confde. And not less miserable courtiers! They make a brave show, no doubt,
living in gilded saloons, wearing sumptuous raiment, and feasting at luxuriant
tables, but their hearts all the while are torn with envy, or tortured with
fear, lest this gay life of theirs should come to a sudden end by the stiletto
or the poison-cup. "Two great sins," says an old historian, "crept into France
under this prince's reign—atheism and magic."
CHAPTER 2
Back to
Top
HENRY II AND HIS
PERSECUTIONS.
Bigotry of Henry II—Persecution—The Tailor and Diana of
Poictiers— The Tailor Burned—The King Witnesses his Execution—Horror of the
King—Martyrdoms—Progress of the Truth—Bishop of Macon—The Gag — First
Protestator Congregation—Attempt to Introduce the Inquisition—National
Disasters—Princes and Nobles become Protestants —A Mercuriale—Arrest of Du
Bourg—A Tournament—The King Killed —Strange Rumors.
Henry II walked in the ways of his father, Francis,
who first made France to sin by beginning a policy of persecution. To the force
of paternal example was added, in the case of Henry, the influence of the maxims
continually poured into his ear by Montmorency, Guise, and Diana of Poictiers.
These counselors inspired him with a terror of Protestantism as pre-eminently
the enemy of monarchs and the source of all disorders in States; and they
assured him that should the Huguenots prevail they would trample his throne into
the dust, and lay France at the feet of atheists and revolutionista The first
and most sacred of duties, they said, was to uphold the old religion. To cut off
its enemies was the most acceptable atonement a prince could make to Heaven.
With such schooling, is it any wonder that the deplorable work of burning
heretics, begun by Francis, went on under Henry; and that the more the king
multiplied his profilgacies, the greater his zeal in kindling the fires by which
he thought he was making atonement for them?[1]
The historians of
the time record a sad story, which unhappily is not a solitary instance of the
bigotry of the age, and the vengeance that was beginning to animate France
against all who favored Protestantism. It affectingly displays the heartless
frivolity and wanton cruelty two qualities never far apart—which characterized
the French court. The coronation of the queen, Catherine de Medici, was
approaching, and Henry, who did his part so ill as a husband in other respects,
resolved to acquit himself with credit in this. He wished to make the coronation
fetes of more than ordinary splendor; and in order to this he resolved to
introduce what would form a new feature in these rejoicings, and give variety
and piquancy to them, namely, the burning piles of four Huguenots. Four victims
were selected, and one of these was a poor tailor, who, besides having eaten
flesh on a day on which its use was forbidden, had given other proofs of being
not strictly orthodox. He was to form, of course, one of the coronation torches;
but to burn him was not enough. It occurred to the Cardinal of Lorraine that a
little amusement might be extracted from the man. The cardinal pictured to
himself the confusion that would overwhelm the poor tailor, were he to be
interrogated before the king, and how mightily the court would be diverted by
the incoherence of his replies. He was summoned before Henry, but the matter
turned out not altogether as the Churchman had reckoned it would. The promise
was fulfilled to tike confessor, "When ye shall be brought before kings and
rulers for my sake and the Gospel's, it shall be given you in that hour what ye
shall speak." So far from being abashed, the tailor maintained perfect composure
in the royal presence, and replied so pertinently to all interrogatories and
objections put by the Bishop of Macon, that it was the king and the courtiers
who were disconcerted. Diana of Poictiers—whose wit was still fresh, if her
beauty had faded—stepped boldly forward, in the hope of rescuing the courtiers
from their embarrassment; but, as old Crespin says, "the tador cut her cloth
otherwise than she expected; for he, not being able to endure such unmeasured
arrogance in her whom he knew to be the cause of these cruel persecutions, said
to her, 'Be satisfied, Madam, with having infected France, without mingling your
venom and filth in a matter altogether holy and sacred, as is the religion and
truth of our Lord Jesus Christ.'"[2] The king took the words as
an affront, and ordered the man to be reserved for the stake. When the day of
execution came (14th July, 1549), the king bade a window overlooking the pile be
prepared, that thence he might see the man, who had had the audacity to insult
his favorite, slowly consuming in the fires. Both parties had now taken their
places, the tailor burning at the stake, the king reposing luxuriously at the
window, and Diana of Poictiers seated in haughty triumph by his side. The martyr
looked up to the window where the king was seated, and fixed his eye on Henry.
From the midst of the flames that eye looked forth with calm steady gaze upon
the king. The eye of the monarch quailed before that of the burning mam. He
turned away to avoid it, but again his glance wandered back to the stake. The
flames were still blazing around the martyr; has limbs were dropping off, his
face was growing fearfully livid, but his eye, unchanged, was still looking at
the king; and the king felt as if, with Medusa-power, it was changing him into
stone.
The execution was at an end: not so the terror of the king. The
tragedy of the day was reacted in the dreams of the night. The terrible
apparition rose before Henry in his sleep. There again was the blazing pile,
there was the martyr burning in the fire, and there was the eye looking forth
upon him from the midst of the flames. For several successive nights was the
king scared by this terrible vision. He resolved, nay, he even took an oath,
that never again would he be witness to the burning of a heretic. It had been
still better had he given orders that never again should these horrible
executions be renewed [3] .
So far, however,
was the persecution from being relaxed, that its rigor was greatly increased.
Piles were erected at Orleans, at Poictiers, at Bordeaux, at Nantes — in short,
in all the chief cities of the kingdom. These cruel proceedings, however, so far
from arresting the progress of the Reformed opinions, only served to increase
the number of their professors. Men of rank in the State, and of dignity in the
Church, now began, despite the dis-favor in which all of the "religion" were
held at court, to enroll themselves in the Protestant army. But the Gospel in
France was destined to owe more to men of humble faith than to the possessors of
rank, however lofty. We have mentioned Chatelain, Bishop of Macon, who disputed
with the poor tador before Henry II. As Beza remarks, one thing only did he
lack, even grace, to make him one of the most brilliant characters and most
illustrious professors of the Gospel in France. Lowly born, Chatelain had raised
himself by his great talents and beautiful character. He sat daily at the table
of Francis I, among the scholars and wise men whom the king loved to hear
discourse. To the accomplishments of foreign travel he added the charms of an
elegant latinity. He favored the new opinions, and undertook the defense of
Robert Stephens, the king's printer, when the Sorbonne attacked him for his
version of the Bible.[4] These acquirements and
gifts procured his being made Bishop of Macon. But the miter would seem to have
cooled his zeal for the Reformation, and in the reign of Henry II we find him
persecuting the faith he had once defended. Soon after his encounter with the
tailor he was promoted to the See of Orleans, and he set out to take possession
of his new bishopric. Arriving at a monastery in the neighborhood of Orleans, he
halted there, intending to make his entry into the city on the morrow. The
Fathers persuaded him to preach; and, as Beza remarks, to see a bishop in a
pulpit was so great a wonder in those days, that the sight attracted an immense
crowd. As the bishop was thundering against heretics, he was struck with a
sudden and violent illness, and had to be carried out of the pulpit. He died the
following night.[5] At the very gates of his
episcopal city, on the very steps of his episcopal throne, he encountered sudden
arrest, and gave up the ghost.
Five days thereafter (9th July, 1550),
Paris was lighted up with numerous piles. Of these martyrs, who laid gloriously
with their blood the foundations of the French Protestant Church, we must not
omit the names of Leonard Galimar, of Vendome, and Florent Venot, of Sedan. The
latter endured incredible torments, for no less a period than four years, in the
successive prisons into which he was thrown. His sufferings culminated when he
was brought to Paris. He was there kept for six weeks in a hole where he could
neither lie, nor stand upright, nor move about, and the odour of which was
beyond measure foul and poisonous, being filled with all manner of abominable
filth. His keepers said that they had never known any one inhabit that dreadful
place for more than fifteen days, without losing either life or reason. But
Venot surmounted all these sufferings with a most admirable courage. Being
burned alive in the Place Maubert, he ceased not at the stake to sing and
magnify the Savior, till his tongue was cut out, and even then he continued to
testify his joy by signs.[6]
In the following
year (1551) a quarrel broke out between Henry and Pope Julius III, the cause
being those fruitful sources of strife, the Duchies of Parma and Placentia, The
king showed his displeasure by forbidding his subjects to send money to Rome,
and by protesting against the Council of Trent, the Fathers having returned for
the second time to that town. But this contention between the king and the Pope
only tended to quicken the flames of persecution. Henry wished to make it clear
to his subjects that it was against the Pope in his temporal and not in his
spiritual character that he had girded on the sword; that if he was warring
against the Prince of the Roman States, his zeal had not cooled for the Holy
See; and that if Julius the monarch was wicked, and might be resisted, Julius
the Pope was none the less entitled to the obedience of all Christians.[7]
To teach the
Protestants, as Maimbourg observes, that they must not take advantage of these
quarrels to vent their heresies, there was published at this time (27th June)
the famous Edict of Chateaubriand, so called from the place where it was given.
By this law, all former severities were re-enacted; the cognizance of the crime
of heresy was given to the secular power; informers were rewarded with the
fourth part of the forfeited goods; the possessions and estates of all those who
had fled to Geneva were confiscated to the king; and no one was to hold any
office under the crown, or teach any science, who could not produce a
certificate of being a good Romanist.[8] This policy has at all
times been pursued by the monarchs of France when they quarrelled with the Pope.
It behooved them, they felt, all the more that they had incurred suspicion, to
vindicate the purity of their orthodoxy, and their claim to the proud title of
"the Eldest Son of the Church."
Maurice, Elector of Saxony, was at this
time prosecuting his victorious campaign against Charles V. The relations which
the King of France had contracted with the Protestant princes, and which enabled
him to make an expedition into Lorraine, and to annex Metz and other cities to
his crown, moderated for a short while the rigors of persecution. But the Peace
of Passau (1552), which ratified the liberties of the Protestants of Germany,
rekindled the fires in France. "Henry having no more measures to observe with
the Protestant princes," says Laval, "nothing was to be seen in his kingdom but
fires kindled throughout all the provinces against the poor Reformed."[9] Vast numbers were executed
in this and the following year. It was now that the gag was brought into use for
the first time. It had been invented on purpose to prevent the martyrs
addressing the people at the stake, or singing psalms to solace themselves when
on their way to the pile. "The first who suffered it," says Laval, "was Nicholas
Noil, a book-hawker, who was executed at Paris in the most barbarous manner."[10]
The scene of
martyrdom was in those days at times the scene of conversion. Of this, the
following incident is a proof. Simon Laloe, of Soisson, was offering up his life
at Dijon. As he stood at the stake, and while the faggots were being kindled, he
delivered an earnest prayer for the conversion of his persecutors. The
executioner, Jacques Sylvester, was so affected that his tears never ceased to
flow all the time he was doing his office. He had heard no one before speak of
God, or of the Gospel, but he could not rest till he was instructed in the
Scriptures. Having received the truth, he retired to Geneva, where he died a
member of the Reformed Church.[11] The same stake that gave
death to the one, gave life to the other.
The insatiable avarice of Diana
of Poictiers, to whom the king had gifted the forfeited estates of the Reformed,
not less than zeal for Romanism, occasioned every day new executions. The truth
continued notwithstanding to spread. "When the plague," says Maimbourg, "attacks
a great city, it matters little what effort is made to arrest it. It enters
every door; it traverses every street; it invades every quarter, and pursues its
course till the whole community have been enveloped in its ravages: so did this
dangerous sect spread through France. Every day it made new progress, despite
the edicts with which it was assailed, and the dreadful executions to wlfich so
many of its members were consigned."[12] It was in the midst of
this persecution that the first congregations of the Reformed Church in France
were settled with pastors, and began to be governed by a regular
discipline.
The first Church to be thus constituted was in Paris;
"where," says Laval, "the fires never went out." At that time the disciples of
the Gospel were wont to meet in the house of M. de la Ferriere, a wealthy
gentleman of Maine, who had come to reside in the capital. M. de la Ferriere had
a child whom he wished to have baptized, and as he could not present him to the
priests for that purpose, nor undertake a journey to Geneva, he urged the
Christians, who were wont to assemble in his house, to elect one of themselves
to the office of pastor, with power to administer the Sacraments. They were at
last prevailed upon, and, after prayer and fasting, their choice fell on Jean
Maqon de la Riviere. IIe was the son of the king's attorney at Angers, a rich
man, but a bitter enemy of Protestantism. He was so offended at his son for
embracing the Reformed faith, that he would have given him up to the judges, had
he not fled to Paris. The sacrifice which M. de la Riviere had made to preserve
the purity of his conscience, fixed the eyes of the little flock upon him. In
him we behold the first pastor of the Reformed Church of France,[13] elected forty years after
Lefevre had first opened the door for the entrance of the Protestant doctrines.
"They chose likewise," says Laval, speaking of this little flock, "some amongst
them to be elders and deacons, and made such other regulations for the
government of their Church as the times would allow. Such were the first
beginnings of the Church of Paris in the month of September, 1555, which
increased daily during the war of Henry II with Charles V."[14]
If France blazed
with funeral piles, it was day by day more widely illuminated with the splendor
of truth. This gave infinite vexation and torment to the friends of Rome, who
wearied themselves to devise new methods for arresting the progress of the
Gospel. Loud accusations and reproaches passed between the courts of
jurisdiction for not showing greater zeal in executing the edicts against
heresy. The cognizance of that crime was committed sometimes to the royal and
sometimes to the ecclesiastical judges, and sometimes parted between them. The
mutual recriminations still continued. A crime above all crimes, it was said,
was leniently treated by those whose duty it was to pursue it without
mercy.
At last, in the hope of attaining the requisite rigor, the
Cardinal of Lorraine stripped the Parliament and the civil judges of the right
of hearing such causes, and transferred it to the bishops, leaving nothing to
the others but the mere execution of the sentence against the condemned. This
arrangement the cardinal thought to perfect by establishing the Inquisition in
France on the Spanish model. In this, however, he did not succeed, the
Parliament having reftused its consent thereto.[15]
The calamities that
befell the kingdom were a cover to the evangelization. Henry II had agreed on a
truce with the Emperor Charles for five years. It did not, however, suit the
Pope that the truce should be kept. Paul IV sent his legate to France to
dispense Henry from his oath, and induce him to violate the peace. The flames of
war were rekindled, but the French arms were disgraced. The battle of St.
Quentin was a fatal blow to France, and the Duke of Guise was recalled from
Italy to retrieve it. He recovered in the Low Countries the reputation which he
had lost in Sicily;[16] but even this tended in
the issue to the weakening of France. The duke's influence at court was now
predominant, and the intrigues which his great rival, Montmorency, set on foot
to supplant him, led to the Treaty of Cateau Cambresis (1559), by which France
lost 198 strongholds,[17] besides the deepening of
the jealousies and rivalships between the House of Lorraine and that of the
Constable, which so nearly proved the ruin of France. One main inducement with
Henry to conclude this treaty with Philip of Spain, was that it left him free to
prosecute the design formed by the Cardinal of Lorraine and the Bishop of Arras
for the utter extirpation of the Reformed.
In fact, the treaty contained
a secret clause binding both monarchs to combine their power for the utter
extirpation of heresy in their dominions. But despite the growing rigor of the
persecution, the shameful slanders which were propagated against the Reformed,
and the hideous deaths in-fiicted on persons of all ages and both sexes, the
numbers of the Protestants and their courage daily increased. It was now seen
that scarcely was there a class of French society which did not furnish converts
to the Gospel. Mezeray says that there was no town, no province, no trade in the
kingdom wherein the new opinions had not taken root. The lawyers, the learned,
nay, the ecclesiastics, against their own interest, embraced them.[18] Some of the greatest
nobles of France now rallied round the Protestant standard. Among these was
Antoine de Bourbon, Duke of Vendome, and first prince of the blood, and Louis de
Bourbon, Prince of Conde, his brother. With these were joined two nephews of the
Constable Montmorency, the Admiral Gaspard de Coligny, and his brother, Francois
de Chatilion, better known as the Sire d'Andelot. A little longer and all France
would be Lutheran. The king's alarm was great: the alarm of all about him was
not less so, and all united in urging upon him the adoption of yet more summary
measures against an execrable belief, which, if not rooted out, would most
surely overthrow his throne, root out his house, and bring his kingdom to ruin.
Might not the displeasure of Heaven, evoked by that impious sect, be read in the
many dark calamities that were gathering round France.
It was resolved
that a "Mercuriale," as it is called in France, should be held, and that the
king, without giving previous notice of his coming, should present himself in
the assembly. He would thus see and hear for himself, and judge if there were
not, even among his senators, men who favored this pestilent heresy. It had been
a custom from the times of Charles VIII (1493), when corruption crept into the
administration, and the State was in danger of receiving damage, that
representatives of all the principal courts of the realm should meet, in order
to inquire into the evil, and admonish one another to greater vigilance. Francis
I had ordered that these "Censures" should take place once every three months,
and from the day on which they were held—namely, Wednesday (Dies Mercurii)— they
were named "Mercuriales."[19]
On the 10th of
June, 1559, the court met in the house of the Austin Friars, the Parliament Hall
not being available, owing to the preparations for the wedding of the king's
daughter and sister. The king suddenly appeared in the assembly, attended by the
princes of the blood, the Constable, and the Guises. Having taken his seat on
the throne, he delivered a discourse on religion; he enlarged on his own labors
for the peace of Christendom, which he was about to seal by giving in marriage
his daughter Elizabeth to Philip of Spain, and his only sister Margaret to
Philibert Emmanuel, Duke of Savoy; and he concluded by announcing his resolution
to devote himself henceforward to the healing of the wounds of the Christian
world. He then ordered the senators to go on with their votes.
Though all
felt that the king was present to overawe them in the expression of their
sentiments, many of the senators declared themselves with that ancient liberty
which became their rank and office. They pointed to the fact that a Council was
at that moment convened at Trent to pronounce on the faith, and that it was
unjust to burn men for heresy before the Council had decreed what was heresy.
Arnold du Ferrier freely admitted that the troubles of France sprang out of its
religious differences, but then they ought to inquire who was the real author of
these differences, lest, while pursuing the sectaries, they should expose
themselves to the rebuke, "Thou art the man that troubles Israel."
Annas
du Bourg, who next rose, came yet closer to the point. There were, he said, many
great crimes and wicked actions, such as oaths, adulteries, and perjuries,
condemned by the laws, and deserving of the severest punishment, which went
without correction, while new punishments were every day invented for men who as
yet had been found guilty of no crime. Should those be held guilty of high
treason who mentioned the name of the prince only to pray for him? and should
the rack and the stake be reserved, not for those who raised tumults in the
cities, and seditions in the provinces, but for those who were the brightest
patterns of obedience to the laws, and the firmest defenders of order! It was a
very grave matter, he added, to condemn to the flames men who died calling on
the name of the Lord Jesus. Other speakers followed in the same strain. Not so
the majority, however. They recalled the examples of old days, when the
Albigensian heretics had been slaughtered in thousands by Innocent III; and when
the Waldenses, in later times, had been choked with smoke in their owal
dwellings, and the dens of the mountains; and they urged the instant adoption of
these time-honored usages. When the opinions of the senators had been marked,
the king took possession of the register in which the votes were recorded, then
rising up, he sharply chid those members who had avowed a preference for a
moderate policy; and, to show that under a despot no one could honestly differ
from the royal opinion and be held guiltless, he ordered the Constable to arrest
Du Bourg. The captain of the king's guard instantly seized the obnoxious
senator, and carried him to the Bastile. Other members of Parliament were
arrested next day at their own houses.[20]
The king's
resohtion was fully taken to execute all the senators who had opposed him, and
to exterminate Lutheranism everywhere throughout France. He, would begin with Du
Bourg, who, shut up in an iron cage in the Bastile, waited his doom. But before
the day of Du Bourg's execution arrived, Henry himself had gone to his account.
We have already mentioned the delight the king took in jousts and tournaments.
He was giving his eldest daughter in marriage to the mightiest prince of his
time — Philip II of Spain—and so great an occasion he must needs celebrate with
fetes of corresponding magnificence. Fourteen days have elapsed since his
memorable visit to his Parliament, and now Henry presents himself in a very
different assemblage. It is the last day of June, 1559, and the rank and beauty
of Paris are gathered in the Faubourg St. Antoine, to see the king tilting with
selected champions in the lists. The king bore himself "like a sturdy and
skillful cavalier" in the mimic war. The last passage-at-arms was over, the
plaudits of the brilliant throng had saluted the royal victor, and every one
thought, that the spectacle was at an end. But no; it wan to close with a
catastrophe of which no one present. so much as dreamed. A sudden resolve
seizing the king yet farther to display his prowess before the admiring
multitude, he bade the Count Montgomery, the captain of his guard, make ready
and run a tilt with him. Montgomery excused himself, but the king insisted.
Mounting his horse and placing his lance in rest, Montgomery stood facing the
king. The trumpet sounded. The two warriors, urging their steeds to a gallop,
rushed at each other:
Montgomery's lance struck the king with such force
that the staff was shivered. The blow made Henry's visor fly open, and a
splinter from the broken beam entered his left eye and drove into his brain. The
king fell from his horse to the ground. A thrill of horror ran through the
spectators. Was the king slain? No; but he was mortally wounded, and the
death-blow had been dealt by the same hand—that of the captain of his guard
which he had employed to arrest the martyr Du Bourg. He was carried to the Hotel
de Tournelles, where he died on the 10th of July, in the forty-first year of his
age.[21]
Many strange things
were talked of at the time; and have been related by contemporary historians, in
connection with the death of Henry II. His queen, Catherine de Medici, had a
dream the night before, in which she saw him tilting in the tournament, and so
hard put to, that in the morning when she awoke she earnestly begged him that
day not to stir abroad; but, says Beza, he no more heeded the warning than
Julius Caesar did that of his wife, who implored him on the morning of the day
on which he was slain not to go to the Senate-house. Nor did it escape
observation that the same palace which had been decked out with so much
magmiflcence for the two marriages was that in which the king breathed his last,
and so "the hall of triumph was changed into the chamber of mourning." And,
finally, it was thought not a little remarkable that when the bed was prepared
on which Henry was to lie in state, and the royal corpse laid upon it, the
attendants, not thinking of the matter at all, covered it with a rich piece of
tapestry on which was represented the conversion of St. Paul, with the words in
large letters, "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?" This was remarked upon by
so many who saw it, that the officer who had charge of the body ordered the
coverlet to be taken away, and replaced with another piece.[22] The incident recalled the
last words of Julian, who fell like Henry, warring against Christ: "Thou hast
overcome, 0 Galilean!"
CHAPTER 3
Back to
Top
FIRST NATIONAL SYNOD
OF THE FRENCH PROTESTANT CHURCH.
Early Assemblies of French
Protestants—Colportage—Holy Lives—The Planting of Churches throughout
France—Play at La Rochelle—First National Synod—Confession of Faith of the
French Church— Constitution and Government—Gradation of Courts - Order and
Liberty - Piety Flourishes.
The young vine which had been planted in France, and
which was beginning to cover with its shadow the plains of that fair land, was
at this moment sorely shaken by the tempests; but the fiercer the blasts that
warred around it, the deeper did it strike its roots in the soil, and the higher
did it lift its head into the heavens. There were few districts or cities in
France in which there was not to be found a little community of disciples. These
flocks had neither shepherd to care for them, nor church in which to celebrate
their worship. The violence of the times taught them to shun observation;
nevertheless, they neglected no means of keeping alive the Divine life in their
souls, and increasing their knowledge of the Word of God. They assembled at
stated times, to read together the Scriptures, and to join in prayer, and at
these gatherings the more intelligent or the more courageous of their number
expounded a passage from the Bible, or delivered a word of exhortation. These
teachers, however, confined themselves to doctrine. They did not dispense the
Sacraments, for Calvin, who was consulted on the point, gave it as his opinion
that, till they had obtained the services of a regularly ordained ministry, they
should forego celebrating the Lord's Supper. They were little careful touching
the fashion of the place in which they offered their united prayer and sang
their psalm. It might be a garret, or a cellar, or a barn. It might be a cave of
the mountains, or a glen in the far wilderness, or some glade shaded by the
ancient trees of the forest. Assemble where they might, they knew that there was
One ever in the midst of them, and where he was, there was the Church. One of
their number gave notice to the rest of the time and place of meeting. If in a
city, they took care that the house should have several secret doors, so that,
entering by different ways, their assembling might attract no notice. And lest
their enemies should break in upon them, they took the precaution of bringing
cards and dice with them, to throw upon the table in the room of their Bibles
and psalters, as a make-believe that they had been interrupted at play, and were
a band of gamblers instead of a congregation of Lutherans.[1]
In the times we
speak of, France was traversed by an army of book-hawkers. The printing-presses
of Geneva, Lausanne, and Neuchatel supplied Bibles and religious books in
abundance, and students of theology, and sometimes even ministers, assuming the
humble office of colporteurs carried them into France. Staff in hand, and pack
slung on their back, they pursued their way, summer and winter, by highways and
cross-roads, through forests and over marshes, knocking from door to door, often
repulsed, always hazarding their lives, and at times discovered, and dragged to
the pile. By their means the Bible gained admission into the mansions of the
nobles, and the cottages of the peasantry. They employed the same methods as the
ancient Vaudois colporteur to conceal their calling. Their precious wares they
deposited at the bottom of their baskets, so that one meeting them in city
alley, or country highway, would have taken them for vendors of silks and
jewelry—a deception for which Florimond de Raemond rebukes them, without,
however, having a word in condemnation of the violence that rendered the
concealment necessary. The success of these humble and devoted evangelists was
attested by the numbers whom they prepared for the stake, and who, in their
turn, sowed in their blood the seed of new confessors and martyrs.
At
times, too, though owing to the fewness of pastors it was only at considerable
intervals, these little assemblies of believing men and women had the
much-prized pleasure of being visited by a minister of the Gospel. From him they
learned how it was. going with their brethren in other parts of France. Their
hearts swelled and their eyes brightened as he told them that, despite the fires
everywhere burning, new converts were daily pressing forward to enroll
themselves in the army of Christ, and that the soldiers of the Cross were
multiplying faster than the stake was thinning them. Then covering the table,
and placing upon it the "bread" and "cup," he would dispense the Lord's Supper,
and bind them anew by that holy pledge to the service of their heavenly King,
even unto the death. Thus the hours would wear away, till the morning was on the
point of breaking, and they would take farewell of each other as men who would
meet no more till, by way of the halter or the stake, they should reassemble in
heaven. The singular beauty of the lives of these men attracted the notice, and
extorted even the praise, of their bitterest enemies. It was a new thing in
France. Florimond de Raemond, ever on the watch for their halting, could find
nothing of which to accuse them save that "instead of dances and Maypoles they
set on foot Bible-readings, and the singing of spiritual hymns, especially the
psalms after they had been turned into rhyme. The women, by their deportment and
modest apparel, appeared in public like sorrowing Eves, or penitent Magdalenes,
as Tertullian said of the Christian women of his day. The men too, with their
mortified air, seemed to be overpowered by the Holy Ghost."[2] It does not seem to have
occurred to the monkish chronicler to inquire why it was that what he considered
an evil tree yielded fruits like these, although a true answer to that question
would have saved France from many crimes and woes. If the facts were as Raemond
stated them—if the confessors of an heretical and diabolical creed were men of
preeminent virtue the conclusion was inevitable, either that he had entirely
misjudged regarding their creed, or that the whole moral order of things had
somehow or other come to be reversed. Even Catherine de Medici, in her own way,
bore her testimony to the moral character of Protestantism. "I have a mind,"
observed she one day, "to turn to the new religion, to pass for a prude and a
pious woman." The persecutors of that age are condemned out of their own mouths.
They confess that they "killed the innocent."
Truly wonderful was the
number of Protestant congregations already formed in France at the time of the
death of Henry II. "Burning," yet "not consumed," the Reformed Church was even
green and flourishing, because refreshed with a secret dew, which was more
eiticacious to preserve its life than all the fury of the flames to extinguish
it. We have already recorded the organization of the Church in Paris, in 1555.
It was followed in that and the five following years by so many others in all
parts of France, that we can do little save recite the names of these Churches.
The perils and martyrdoms through which each struggled into existence, before
taking its place on the soil of France, we cannot recount. The early Church of
Meaux, trodden into the dust years before, now rose from its ruins. In 1546 it
had seen fourteen of its members burned; in 1555 it obtained a settled pastor.[3] At Angers (1555) a
congregation was formed, and placed under the care of a pastor from Geneva. At
Poictiers, to which so great an interest belongs as the flock which Calvin
gathered together, and to whom he dispensed, for the first time in France, the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, a congregation was regularly organized (1555).
It happened that the plague came to Poictiers, and drove from the city the
bitterest enemies of the Reformation; whereupon its friends, taking heart,
formed themselves into a Church, which soon became so flourishing that it
supplied pastors to the congregations that by-and-by sprang up in the
neigh-bourhood.[4] At Alevert, an island
lying off the coast of Saintonge, a great number of the inhabitants received the
truth, and were formed into a congregation in 1556. At Agen, in Guienne, a
congregation was the same year organized, of which Pierre David, a converted
monk, became pastor. He was afterwards chaplain to the King of
Navarre.
At Bourges, at Aubigny, at Issoudun, at Blois, at Tours, at
Montoine, at Pau in Bearn, Churches were organized under regular pastors in the
same year, 1556. To these are to be added the Churches at Montauban and
Angouleme.[5]
In the year
following (1557), Protestant congregations were formed, and placed under
pastors, at Orleans, at Sens, at Rouen in Normandy, and in many of the towns and
villages around, including Dieppe on the shores of the English Channel.
Protestantism had penetrated the mountainous region of the Cevennes, and left
the memorials of its triumphs amid a people proverbially primitive and rude, in
organized Churches. In Brittany numerous Churches arose, as also along both
banks of the Garonne, in Nerac, in Bordeaux, and other towns too numerous to be
mentioned. In Provence, the scene of recent slaughter, there existed no fewer
than sixty Churches in the year 1560. [6]
The beginnings of
the "great and glorious" Church of La Rochelle are obscure. So early as 1534 a
woman was burned in Poitou, who said she had been instructed in the truth at La
Rochelle. From that year we find no trace of Protestantism there till 1552, when
its presence there is attested by the barbarous execution of two martyrs, one of
whom had his tongue cut out for having acted as the teacher of others; from
which we may infer that there was a little company of disciples in that town,
though keeping themselves concealed for fear of the persecutor.[7]
In 1558 the King
and Queen of Navarre, on their way to Paris, visited La Rochelle, and were
splendidly entertained by the citizens. In their suite was M. David, the
ex-monk, and now Protestant preacher, already referred to. He proclaimed openly
the pure Word of God in all the places through which the court passed, and so
too did he in La Rochelle. One day during their majesties' stay at titis city,
the town-crier announced that a company of comedians had just arrived, and would
act that day a new and wonderful piece. The citizens crowded to the play; the
king, the queen, and the court being also present.
When the curtain rose,
a sick woman was seen at the point of death, shrieking in pain, and begging to
be confessed. The parish priest was sent for. He arrived in breathless haste,
decked out in his canonicals. He began to shrive his penitent, but to little
purpose. Tossing from side to side, apparently in greater distress than ever,
she cried out that she was not well confessed. Soon a crowd of ecclesiastics had
assembled round the sick woman, each more anxious than the other to give her
relief. One wouldhave thought that in such a multitude of physicians a cure
would be found; but no: her case baffled all their skill. The friars next took
her in hand. Opening great bags which they had brought with them, they drew
forth, with solemn air, beads which they gave her to count, relics which they
applied to various parts of her person, and indulgences which they read to her,
with a perfect confidence that these would work an infallible cure.
It
was all in vain. Not one of these renowned specifics gave her the least
mitigation of her sufferings. The friars were perfectly non-plussed. At last
they bethought them of another expedient. They put the habit of St. Francis upon
her. Now, thought they, as sure as St. Francis is a saint, she is cured. But,
alas! attired in cowl and frock, the poor sick woman sat rocking from side to
side amid the friars, still grievously tormented by the pain in her conscience,
and bemoaning her sad condition, that those people understood not how to confess
her. At that point, when priest and friar had exhausted their skill, and neither
rosary nor holy habit could work a cure, one stepped upon the stage, and going
up to the woman, whispered into her ear that he knew a man who would confess her
right, and give her ease in her conscience; but, added he, he goes abroad only
in the night-time, for the day-light is hurtful to him. The sick person
earnestly begged that that man might be called to her. He was straightway sent
for: he came in a lay-dress, and drawing near the bolster, he whispered
something in the woman's ear which the spectators did not hear. They saw,
however, by her instant change of expression, that she was well pleased with
what had been told her. The mysterious man next drew out of his pocket a small
book, which he put into her hand, saying aloud, "This book contains the most
infallible recipes for the curing of your disease; if you will make use of them,
you will recover your health perfectly in a few days." Hereupon he left the
stage, and the sick woman, getting out of bed with cheerful air, as one
perfectly cured, walked three times round the stage, and then turning to the
audience, told them that that unknown man had succeeded where friar and priest
had failed, and that she must confess that the book he had given her was full of
most excellent recipes, as they themselves might see from the happy change it
had wrought in her; and if any of them was afflicted with the same disease, she
would advise them to consult that book, which she would readily lend them; and
if they did not mind its being somewhat hot in the handling, and having about it
a noisome smell like that of a fagot, they might rest assured it would certainly
cure them. If the audience desired to know her name, and the book's name, she
said, they were two riddles which they might guess at.[8]
The citizens of La
Rochelle had no great difficulty in reading the riddle. Many of them made trial
of the book, despite its associations with the stake and the fagot, and they
found that its efficacy sufficiently sovereign to cure them. They obtained
deliverance from that burden on the conscience which had weighed them down in
fear and anguish, despite all that friar or penance could do to give them ease.
From that time Protestantism flourished in La Rochelle; a Church was formed, its
members not darng as yet, however, to meet for worship in open day, but
assembling under cloud of night, as was still the practice in almost all places
in France.
We are now arrived at a new and most important development of
Protestantism in France. As has been already mentioned, the crowns of France and
Spain made peace between themselves, that they might be at liberty to turn their
arms against Protestantism, and effect its extermination. Both monarchs were
preparing to inflict a great blow. It was at that hour that the scattered
sections of the French Protestant Church drew together, and, rallying around a
common standard, presented a united front to their enemies.
It was forty
years since Lefevre had opened the door of France to the Gospel. All these years
there had been disciples, confessors, martyrs, but no congregations in our sense
of the term. The little companies of believing men and women scattered over the
country, were cared for and fed only by the Great Shepherd, who made them lie
down int he green pastures of his Word, and by the still waters of his Spirit.
But this was an incomplete and defective condition. Christ's people are not only
a "flock," but a "kingdom," and it is the peculiarity of a kingdom that it
possesses "order and government" as well as subjects. The former exists for the
edification and defense of the latter.
In 1555 congregations began to be
formed on the Genevan model. A pastor was appointed to teach, and with him was
associated a small body of laymen to watch over the morals of the flock. The
work of organizing went on vigorously, and in 1560 from one to two thousand
Protestant congregations existed in France. Thus did the individual congregation
come into existence. But the Church of God needs a wider union, and a more
centralized authority.
Scattered over the wide space that separates the
Seine from the Rhone and the Garonne, the Protestant Churches of France were
isolated and apart. In the fact that they had common interests and common
dangers, a basis was laid, they felt, for confederation. In this way would the
wisdom of all be available for the guidance of each, and the strength of each be
combined for the defense of all.
As the symbol of such a confederation it
was requisite that a creed should be drafted which all might confess, and a code
of discipline compiled to which all would submit. Not to fetter the private
judgment of individual Christians, nor to restrict the rights of individual
congregations, was this creed framed; on the contrary, it was intended as a
shield of both liberty of opinion and liberty of Christian action. But in order
to effect this, it was essential that it should be drawn from the doctrines of
the Bible and the models of apostolic times, with the same patient
investigation, and the same accurate deduction, with which men construct a
science from the facts which they observe in nature, but with greater submission
of mind, inasmuch as the facts observed for the framing of a creed are of
supernatural revelation, and with a more anxious vigilance to avoid error where
error would be so immensely more pernicious and destructive, and above all, with
a dependence on that Spirit who inspired the Word, and who has been promised to
enlighten men in the true sense of it. As God has revealed himself in his Word,
so the Church is bound to reveal the Word to the world. The French Protestant
Church now discharged that duty to its nation.
It was agreed between the
Churches of Paris and Poictiers, in 1558, that a National Synod should be held
for the purpose of framing a common confession and a code of discipline. In the
following spring, circular letters were addressed to all the Churches of the
kingdom, and they, perceiving the benefit to the common cause likely to acrue
from the step, readily gave their consent. It was unanimously agreed that the
Synod should be held in Paris. The capital was selected, says Beza, not because
any preeminence or dignity was supposed to belong to the Church there, but
simply because the confluence of so many ministers and elders was less likely to
attract notice in Paris than in a provincial town.[9] As regards rank, the
representative of the smallest congregation stood on a perfect equality with the
deputy of the metropolitan Church.
The Synod met on the 25th of May,
1559. At that moment the Parliament was assembling for the Mercuriale, at which
the king avowed his purpose of pursuing the Reformed with fire and sword till he
had exterminated them. From eleven Churches only came deputies to this Synod:
Paris, St. Lo, Dieppe, Angers, Orleans, Tours, Poictiers, Saintes, Marennes,
Chatellerault, and St. Jean d'Angely.[10] Pastor Francois Morel,
Sieur of Cellonges, was chosen to preside. Infinite difficulties had to be
overcome, says Beza, before the Churches could be advertised of the meeting, but
greater risks had to be run before the deputies could assemble: hence the
fewness of their number. The gibbet was then standing in all the public places
of the kingdom, and had their place of meeting been discovered, without doubt,
the deputies would have been led in a body to the scaffold. There is a
simplicity and a moral grandeur appertaining to this assembly that compels our
homage. No guard stands sentinel at the door. No mace or symbol of authority
traces the table round which the deputies of the Churches are gathered; no robes
of office dignify their persons; on the contrary, royal edicts have proclaimed
them outlaws, and the persecutor is on their track. Nevertheless, as if they
were assembled in peaceful times, and under the shadow of law, they go on day by
day, with calm dignity and serene power, planting the foundations of the House
of God in their native land. They will do their work, although the first stones
should be cemented with their blood.
We can present only an outline of
their great work. Their Confession of Faith was comprehended in forty articles,
and agrees in all essential points with the Creed of the Church of England. They
received the Bible as the sole infallible rule of faith and manners. They
confessed the doctrine of the Trinity; of the Fall, of the entire corruption of
man's nature, and his condemnation; of the election of some to everlasting life;
of the call of sovereign and omnipotent race; of a free redemption by Christ,
who is our righteousness; of that righteousness as the ground of our
justification; of faith, which is the gift of God, as the instrument by which we
obtain an interest in that righteousness; of regeneration by the Spirit to a new
life, and to good works; of the Divine institution of the ministry; of the
equality of all pastors under one chief Pastor and universal Bishop, Jesus
Christ; of the true Church, as composed of the assembly of believers, who agree
to follow the rule of the Word; of the two Sacraments, baptism and the Lord's
Supper; of the policy which Christ has established for the government of his
Church; and of the obedience and homage due to rulers in monarchies and
commonwealths, as God's lieutenants whom he has set to exercise a lawful and
holy office.[11]
Their code of
discipline was arranged also in forty articles. Dismissing details, let us state
in outline the constitution of the Reformed Church of France, as settled at its
first National Synod. Its fundamental idea was that which had been taught both
at Wittemberg and Geneva, namely, that the government of the Church is diffused
throughout the whole body of the faithful, but that the exercise of it is to be
restricted to those to whom Christ, the fountain of that government, has given
the suitable gifts, and whom their fellow Church members have called to its
discharge. On this democratic basis there rose four grades of power:—
Correspending with these
four grades of power there were four circles or areas — the Parish, the
District, the Province, and the Kingdom. Each grade of authority narrowed as it
ascended, while the circle within which it was exercised widened. What had its
beginning in a democracy, ended in a constitutional monarchy, and the interests
of each congregation and each member of the Church were, in the last resort,
adjudicated upon by the wisdom and authority of all. There was perfect liberty,
combined with perfect order.
Let us sketch briefly the constitution of
each separate court, with the sphere within which, and the responsibilities
under which, it exercised its powers. First came the Consistory. It bore rule
over the congregation, and was composed of the minister, elders, and deacons.
The minister might be nominated by the Consistory, or by the Colloquy, or by the
Provincial Synod, but he could not be ordained till he had preached three
several Sundays to the congregation, and the people thus had had an opportnnity
of testing his gifts, and his special fitness to be their pastor. The elders and
deacons were elected by the congregatiom
The Colloquy came next, and was
composed of all the congregations of the district. Each congregation was
represented in it by one pastor and one elder or deacon. The Colloquy met twice
every year, and settled all questions referred to it from the congregations
within its limits. Next came the Provincial Synod. It comprehended all the
Colloquies of the Province, every congregation sending a pastor and an elder to
it. The Provincial Synod met once a year, and gave judgment in all cases of
appeal from the court below, and generally in all matters deemed of too great
weight to be determined in the Colloquy.
At the head of this gradation of
ecclesiastical authority came the National Synod. It was composed of two pastors
and two elders from each of the Provincial Synods, and had the whole kingdom for
its domain or circle. It was the court of highest judicature; it determined all
great causes, and heard all appeals, and to its authority, in the last resort,
all were subject. It was presided over by a pastor chosen by the members. His
preeminence was entirely official, and ended at the moment the Synod had closed
its sittings.
In the execution of their great task, these first builders
of the Protestant Church in France availed themselves of the counsel of Calvin.
Nevertheless, their eyes were all the while directed to a higher model than
Geneva, and they took their instructions from a higher authority than Calvin.
They studied the New Testament, and what they aimed at following was the pattern
which they thought stood revealed to them there, and the use they made of
Calvin's advice was simply to be able to see that plan more clearly, and to
follow it more closely. Adopting as their motto the words of the apostle — "One
is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren"—they inferred that there
must be government in the Church—" One is your Master"—that the source of that
government is in heaven, namely, Christ; that the revelation of it is in the
Bible, and that the depository of it is in the Church — "All ye are brethren."
Moving between the two great necessities which their motto indicated, authority
and liberty, they strove to adjust and reconcile these two different but not
antagonistic forces—Christ's royalty and his people's brotherhood. Without the
first there could not be order, without the second there could not be freedom.
Their scheme of doctrine preceded their code of discipline; the first had been
accepted before the second was submitted to; thus all the bonds that held that
spiritual society together, and all the influences that ruled it, proceeded out
of the throne in the midst of the Church. If they, as constituted officers,
stood between the Monarch and the subjects of this spiritual empire, it was
neither as legislators nor as rulers, strictly so called. "One" only was Master,
whether as regarded law or government. Their power was not legislative but
administrative, and their rule was not lordly but ministerial; they were the
fellow-servants of those among whom, and for whom, their functions were
discharged.
The Synod sat four days; its place of meeting was never
discovered, and its business finished, its mermbers departed for their homes,
which they reached in safety. Future councils have added nothing of moment to
the constitution of the French Protestant Church, as framed by this its first
National Synod.[12]
The times
subsequent to the holding of this assembly were tunes of great prosperity to the
Protestants of France. The Spirit of God was largely given them; and though the
fires of persecution continued to burn, the pastors were multiplied,
congregations waxed numerous, and the knowledge and purity of their members kept
pace with their increase. The following picture of the French Church at this era
has been drawn by Quick:—"The holy Word of God is duly, truly, and powerfully
preached in churches and fields, in ships and houses, in vaults and cellars, in
all places where the Gospel ministers can have admission and conveniency, and
with singular success. Multitudes are convinced and converted, established and
edified. Christ rideth out upon the white horse of the ministry, with the sword
and the bow of the Gospel preached, conquering and to conquer. His enemies fall
under him, and submit themselves unto him."
"Oh! the unparalleled success
of the plain and earnest sermons of the first Reformers! Multitudes flock in
like doves into the windows of God's ark. As innumerable drops of dew fall from
the womb of the morning, so hath the Lord Christ the dew of his youth. The
Popish churches are drained, the Protestant churches are filled. The priests
complain that their altars are neglected; their masses are now indeed solitary.
Dagon cannot stand before God's ark. Children and persons of riper years are
catechized in the rudiments and principles of the Christian religion, and can
give a satisfactory account of their faith, a reason of the hope that is in
them. By this ordinance do their pious pastors prepare them for communion with
the Lord at his holy table."[13]
CHAPTER 4
Back to
Top
A GALLERY OF
PORTRAITS.
National Decadence—Francis II—Scenes Shift at Court—The
Guises and the Queen-mother—Anthony de Bourbon—His Paltry Character— Prince of
Conde—His Accomplishments—Admiral Coilgny—His Conversion— Embraces the Reformed
Faith—His Daily Life—Great Services—Jeanne d'Albret, Queen of Navarre—Greatness
of her Character—Services to French Protestantism—Her Kingdom of Navarre—Edict
Establishing the Reformed Worship in it—Her Cede— Her Fame.
Henry II went to his grave amid the deepening shadows
of fast-coming calamity. The auspicious signs which had greeted the eyes of men
when he ascended the throne had all vanished before the close of his reign, and
given place to omens of evil. The finances were embarrassed, the army was
dispirited by repeated defeat, the court was a hotbed of intrigue, and the
nation, broken into factions, was on the brink of civil war. So rapid had been
the decline of a kingdom which in the preceding reign was the most flourishing
in Christendom.
Henry II was succeeded on the throne by the eldest of his
four sons, under the title of Francis III. The blood of the Valois and the blood
of the Medici —two corrupt streams—were now for the first time united on the
throne of France. With the new monarch came a shifting of parties in the Louvre;
for of all slippery places in the world those near a throne are the most
slippery. The star of Diana of Poictiers, as a matter of course, vanished from
the firmament where it had shone with bright but baleful splendor. The Constable
Montmorency had a hint given him that his health would be benefited by the air
of his country-seat. The king knew not, so he said to him, how to reward his
great merits, and recompense him for the toil he had undergone in his service,
save by relieving him of the burden of affairs, in order that he might enjoy his
age in quiet, being resolved not to wear him out as a vassal or servant, but
always to honor him as a father.[1] The proud Constable,
grumbling a little, strode off to his Castle of Chantilly, ten leagues from
Paris. The field cleared of these parties, the contest for power henceforward
lay between the Guises and the Queen-mother.
Francis II was a lad of
sixteen, and when we think who had had the rearing of him, we are not surprised
to learn that he was without principles and without morals. Feeble in mind and
body, he was a tool all the more fit for the hand of a bold intriguer. At the
foot of the throne from which she had just descended stood the crafty Italian
woman, his mother, Catherine de Medici: might she not hope to be the
sovereign-counselor of her weak-minded son? During the lifetime of her husband,
Henry II, her just influence as the wife had been baulked by the ascendency of
the mistress, Diana of Poictiers. That rival had been swept from her path, but
another and more legitimate competitor had come in the room of the fallen
favorite. By the side of Francis II, on the throne of France, sat Mary Stuart,
the heir of the Scottish crown, and the niece of the Guises. The king doted upon
her beauty,[2] and thus the niece was
able to keep open the door of the royal closet, and the ear of her husband, to
her uncles. This gave the Guises a prodigious advantage in the game that was now
being played round the person of the king. And when we think how truculent they
were, and how skilled they had now become in the arts by which princes' favor is
to be won, it does not surprise us to learn that in the end of the day they were
foremost in the race. Catherine de Medici was a match for them any day in craft
and ambition, but with the niece of her rivals by the king's side, she found it
expedient still to dissemble, and to go on a little while longer disciplining
herself in those arts in which nature had fitted her to excel, and in which long
practice would at last make her an expert, and then would she grasp the
government of France.
The question which the Queen-mother now put, "What
shall be my policy?" was to be determined by the consideration of who were her
rivals, and what the tactics to which they were committed. Her rivals, we have
just said, were the Guises, the heads of the Roman Catholic party. This threw
Catherine somewhat on the other side. She was nearly as much the bigot as the
Cardinal of Lorraine himself, but if she loved the Pope, still more did she love
power, and in order to grasp it she stooped to caress what she mortally hated,
and reigned to protect what she secretly wished to root out. Thus did God divide
the counsels and the arms of these two Powerful enemies of his Church. Had the
Guises stood alone, the Reformation would have been crushed in France; or had
Catherine de Medici stood alone, a like fate would have befallen it; but
Providence brought both upon the scene together, and made their rivalry a shield
over the little Protestant flock. The Queen-mother now threw herself between the
leaders of the Reformed, and the Guises who were for striking them down without
mercy. The new relation of Catherine brings certain personages upon the stage
whom we have not yet met, but whom it is fitting, seeing they are to be
conspicuous actors in what is to follow, we should now introduce.
The
first is Anthony de Bourbon, Duke of Vendome, and first prince of the blood.
From the same parent stock sprang the two royal branches of France, the Valois
and the Bourbon. Louis IX (St. Louis) had four sons, of whom one was named
Philip and another Robert. From Philip came the line of the Valois, in which the
succession was continued for upwards of 300 years. From Robert, through his
son's marriage with the heiress of the Duchy of Bourbon, came the house of that
name, which has come to fill so large a space in history, and has placed its
members upon the thrones [3] of France, and Spain, and
Naples. Princes of the blood, and adding to that dignity vast possessions, a
genius for war, and generous dispositions, the Bourbons aspired to fill the
first posts in the kingdom. Their pretensions were often troublesome to the
reigming monarch, who found it necessary at times to visit their haughty bearing
with temporary banishment from court. They were under this cloud at the time
when Henry II died. On the accession of Francis II they resolved on returning to
court and resuming their old influence in the government; but to their chagrin
they found those places which they thought they, as princes of the blood, should
have held, already possessed by the Guises. The latter united with the
Queen-mother in repelling their advances, and the Bourbons had again to retire,
and to seek amid the parties of the country that influence which they were
denied in the administration.
Anthony de Bourbon had married Jeanne
d'Albret, who was the most illustrious woman of her time, and one of the most
illustrious women in all history. She was the daughter of Margaret of Valois,
Queen of Navarre, whose genius she inherited, and whom she surpassed in her
gifts of governing, and in her more consistent attachment to the Reformation.
Her fine intellect, elevated soul, and deep piety were unequally yoked with
Anthony de Bourbon, who was a man of humane dispositions, but of low tastes,
indolent habits, and of paltry character. His marriage with Jeanne d'Albret
brought him the title of King of Navarre; but his wife was a woman of too much
sense, and cherished too enlightened a regard for the welfare of her subjects,
to give him more than the title. She took care not to entrust him with the reins
of gevernment. Today, so zealous was he for the Gospel, that he exerted himself
to have the new opinions preached in his wife's dominions; and tomorrow would he
be so zealous for Rome, that he would persecute those who had embraced the
opinions he had appeared, but a little before, so desirous to have propagated.
"Unstable as water," he spent his life in travelling between the two camps, the
Protestant and the Popish, unable long to adhere to either, and heartily
despised by both.[4] The Romanists, knowing the
vulgar ambition that actuated him, promised him a territory which he might
govern in his own right, and he kept pursuing this imaginary princedom. It was a
mere lure to draw him over to their side; and his life ended without his ever
attaining the power he was as eager to grasp as he was unable to wield. He died
fighting in the ranks of the Romanists before the walls of Rouen; and, true to
his character for inconsistency to the last, he is said to have requested in his
dying moments to be re-admitted into the Protestant Church.
His brother,
the Prince of Conde, was a person of greater talent, and more manly character.
He had a somewhat diminutive figure, but this defect was counterbalanced by the
graces of his manner, the wit of his discourse, and the gallantry of his
spirit.[5] He shone equally among the
ladies of the court and the soldiers of the camp. He could be oozy with the one,
and unaffectedly frank and open with the other. The Prince of Conde attached
himself to the Protestant side, from a sincere conviction that the doctrines of
the Reformation were true, that they were favorable to liberty, and that their
triumph would contribute to the greatness of France. But the Prince of Conde was
not a great man. He did not rise to the true height of the cause he had
espoused, nor did he bring to it that large sagacity, that entire devotion of
soul, and that singleness of purpose which were required of one who wouht lead
in such a cause. But what was worse, the Prince of Conde had not wholly escaped
the blight of the profligacy of the age; although he had not suffered by any
means to the same extent as his brother, the King of Navarre. A holy cause
cannot be effectually succoured save by holy hands. "It may be asked whether the
Bourbons, including even Henry IV, did not do as much damage as service to the
Reformation. They mixed it up with politics, thrust it into the field of battle,
dragged it into their private quarrels, and then when it had won for them the
crown, they deserted it."[6]
The next figure
that comes before us is a truly commanding one. It is that of Gaspard de
Coligny, better known as Admiral de Coligny. He towers above the Bourbon
princes, and illustrates the fact that greatness of soul is a much more enviable
possession than mere greatness of rank. Coligny, perhaps the greatest layman of
the French Reformation, was descended from an ancient and honorable house, that
of Chatillon. He was born in the same year in which Luther commenced the
Reformation by the publication of his Theses, 1517. He lost his father on the
24th of August, 1522, being then only five years of age. The 24th of August was
a fatal day to Coliguy, for on that day, fifty years afterwards, he fell by the
poignard of an assassin in the St. Bartholomew Massacre. His mother, Louise de
Montmorency, a lady of lofty virtue and sincere piety, was happily spared to
him, and by her instructions and example those seeds were sown in his youthful
mind which afterwards bore so noble fruit in the cause of his country's religion
and liberty. He was offered a cardinal's hat if he would enter the Church. He
chose instead the profession of arms. He served with great distinction in the
wars of Flanders and Italy, was knighted on the field of battle, and returning
home in 1547 he married a daughter of the illustrious house of Laval—a woman of
magnanimous soul and enlightened piety, worthy of being the wife of such a man,
and by whose prompt and wise counsel he was guided at more than one critical
moment of his life. What he might have been as cardinal we do not know, but in
his own profession as a soldier he showed himself a great reformer and
administrator. Brantome says of the military ordinances which he introduced into
the French army, "They were the best and most politic that have ever been made
in France, and, I believe, have preserved the lives of a million of persons;
for, till then, there was nothing but pillage, brigandage, murders, and
quarrels, so that the companies resembled hordes of wild Arabs rather than noble
soldiers."[7]
At an early age
Coligny was taken prisoner by the Spaniards, and to beguile the solitary hours
of his confinement, he asked for a Bible and some religious books. His request
was complied with, and from that incident dates his attachment to the Reformed
doctrines. But he was slow to declare himself. He must be fully persuaded in his
own mind before openly professing the truth, and he must needs count the cost.
With Coligny, Protestantism was no affair of politics or of party, which he
might cast aside if on trial he found it did not suit. Having put his hand to
the plough, he must not withdraw it, even though, leaving castle and lands and
titles, he should go forth an outcast and a beggar. For these same doctrines men
were being every day burned at the stake.
Before making profession of
them, Coligny paused, that by reading, and converse with the Reformed pastors,
he might arrive at a full resolution of all his doubts. But the step was all the
more decisive when at last it was taken. As men receive the tidings of some
great victory or of some national blessing, so did the Protestants of France
receive the news that Coligny had cast in his lot with the Reformation. They
knew that he must have acted from deep conviction, that his choice would never
be reversed, and that it had brought a mighty accession of intellectual and
moral power to the Protestant cause. They saw in Coligny's adherence an
additional proof of its truth, and a new pledge of its final triumph.
Protestantism in France, just entering on times of awful struggles, had now a
leader worthy of it. A captain had risen up to march before its consecrated
hosts, and fight its holy battles.
From the moment he espoused the
Protestant cause, Coligny's character acquired a new grandeur. The arrangements
of his household were a model of order. He rose early, and having dressed
himself, he summoned his household to prayers, himself leading their devotion.
Business filled up the day and not a few of its hours were devoted to the
affairs of the Church; for deputies were continually arriving at the Castle of
Chatillon from distant congregations, craving the advice or aid of the admiral.
Every other day a sermon was preached before dinner when it chanced, as often
happened, that a minister was living under his roof. At table a psalm was sung,
and a prayer offered. After an early supper came family devotions, and then the
household were dismissed to rest. It mattered not where Colby was, or how
occupied— in the Castle of Chatillon surrounded by his children and servants, or
in the camp amid the throng of captains and soldiers—this was ever the
God-fearing manner of his life. Not a few of the nobles of France felt the power
of his example, and in many a castle the chant of psalms began to be heard,
where aforetime there had reigned only worldly merriment and boisterous
revelry.
To the graces of Christianity there were added, in the character
of Coligny, the gifts of human genius. He excelled in military tactics, and much
of his life was passed on the battle-field; but he was no less fitted to shine
in senates, and to guide in matters of State. His foresight, sagacity, and
patriotism would, had he lived in happier times, have been the source of
manifold blessings to his native country. As it was, these great qualities were
mainly shown in arranging campaigns and fighting battles.
Protestantism
in France, so at least Coligny judged, had nothing for it but to stand to its
defense. A tyranny, exercised in the king's name, but none the less art
audacious usurpation, was trampling on law, outraging all rights, and daily
destroying by horrible deaths the noblest men in France, and the Protestants
felt that they owed it to their faith, to their country, to the generations to
come, and to the public liberties and Reformation of Christendom, to repel force
by force, seeing all other means of redress were denied them. This alone made
Coligny unsheathe the sword. The grand object of his life was freedom of worship
for the Reformed in France. Could he have secured that object, most gladly would
he have bidden adieu for ever to camps and battle-fields, and, casting honors
and titles behind him, been content to live unknown in the privacy of Chatillon.
This, however, was denied him. He was opposed by men who "hated peace," and so
he had to fight on, almost without intermission, till the hour came when he was
called to seal with his blood the cause he had so often defended with his
sword.
Before quitting this gallery of portraits, there is one other
figure which must detain us a little. Her name we have already mentioned
incidentally, but her great qualities make her worthy of more lengthened
observation. Jeanne d'Albret was the daughter of the accomplished and pious
Margaret of Valois; but the daughter was greater than the mother. She had a
finer genius, a stronger character, and she displayed the graces of a more
consistent piety. The study of the Bible drew her thoughts in her early years to
the Reformation, and her convictions ripening into a full belief of its truth,
although untoward circumstances made her long conceal them, she at last, in
1560, made open profession of Protestantism. At that tune not only did the
Protestant cause underlie the anathemas of Popes, but the Parliament of Paris
had put it beyond the pale of law, and having set a price upon the heads of its
adherents, it left them to be hunted down like wild beasts. Jeanne d'Albret,
having made her choice, was as resolute as her husband, Anthony de Bourbon, was
vacillating. Emulating the noble steadfastness of Coligny, she never repented of
her resolution. Whether victory shone or defeat lowered on the Reformed cause,
Jeanne d'Albret was ever by its side. When overtaken by disaster, she was ever
the first to rally its dispirited adherents, and to bring them succor. Her
husband forsook her; her son was taken from her; nothing daunted, she withdrew
to her own principality of Bearn, and there devised, with equal wisdom and
spirit, measures for the Reformation of her own subjects, at the same time that
she was aiding, by her counsels and her resources, the Protestants in all parts
of France.
Her little kingdom lay on the slope of the Pyrenees, looking
toward France, which it touched on its northern frontier. In former times it was
divided into Lower Navarre, of which we have spoken above, and Upper Navarre,
which lay on the southern slope of the Pyrenees, and was conterminous with Old
Castile. Though but a small territory, its position gave Navarre great
importance. Seated on the Pyrenees, it held in the one hand the keys of France,
and in the other those of Spain. It was an object of jealousy to the sovereigns
of both countries. It was coveted especially by the Kings of Spain, and in the
days of Jeanne's grandfather Upper Navarre was torn from its rightful sovereigns
by Ferdinand, King of Arragon, whose usurpation was confirmed by Pope Julius II.
The loss of Upper Navarre inferred the loss of the capital of the kingdom,
Pampeluna, which contained the tombs of its kings. Henceforward it became a
leading object with Jean d'Albret to recover the place of his fathers'
sepulchers, that his own ashes might sleep with theirs, but in this he faded;
and when his granddaughter came to the throne, her dominions were restricted to
that portion of the ancient Navarre which lay on the French side of the
Pyrenees.
In 1560, we have said, Jeanne d'Albret made open profession of
the Protestant faith. In 1563 came her famous edict, dated from her castle at
Pau, abolishing the Popish service throughout Bearn, and introducing the
Protestant worship. The majority of her subjects were already prepared for this
change, and the priests, though powerful, did not venture openly to oppose the
public sentiment. A second royal edict confiscated a great part of the
temporalities of the Church, but without adding them to the crown. They were
divided into three parts. One-third was devoted to the education of the youth,
another third to the relief of the poor, and the remaining third to the support
of the Protestant worship. The private opinion of the Roman Catholic was
respected, and only the public celebration of this worship forbidden. All trials
and punishment for differences of religious opinions were abolished. Where the
majority of the inhabitants were Protestant, the cathedrals were made over to
them for their use, the images, crucifixes, and relics being removed. Where the
inhabitants were equally divided, or nearly so, the two faiths were permitted
the alternate use of the churches. The monasteries were converted into schools,
thus anticipating by three centuries a measure long afterwards adopted by the
Italian and other Continental Governments.
Colleges were founded for the
higher education. Jeanne caused the Bible to be translated into the dialects of
her dominions. She sent to Geneva for ministers, and recalled the native
evangelists who had been driven out of Navarre, in order to the more perfect
instruction of her subjects in the doctrines of the Word of God. Thus did she
labor for the Reformation of her kingdom. The courage she displayed may be
judged of, when we say that the Pope was all the while thundering his
excommunications against her; and that the powerful Kings of Spain and France.
affronted by the erection of an heretical establishment on the frontiers of
their dominions, were threatening to overrun her territory, imprison her person
in the dungeons of the Inquisition, and raze her kingdom from the map of
Europe.
In the midst of these distractions the Queen of Navarre gave
herself to the study of the principles of jurisprudence. Comparing together the
most famous codes of ancient and modern times, she produced, after the labor of
seven years, a body of laws for the government of her kingdom, which was far in.
advance of her times. She entertained the most enlightened views on matters then
little cared for by kings or parliaments. By her wise legislation she encouraged
husbandry, improved the arts, fostered intelligence, and in a short time the
beautiful order and amazing prosperity of her principality attracted universal
admiration, and formed a striking contrast to the disorder, the violence, and
misery that overspread the lands around it. In her dominions not a child was
permitted to grow up uneducated, nor could a beggar be seen. The flourishing
condition of Bearn showed what the mightier realms of Spain and France would
have become, had their peoples been so wise as to welcome the Reformation. The
code of the wise queen continued in operation in the territories of the House of
D'Albret down to almost our own times. She is still remembered in these parts,
where she is spoken of as the "good queen."
We have dwelt the longer upon
these portraits because one main end of history is to present us with such. The
very contemplation of them is ennobling. In a recital like the present, which
brings before us some of the worst of men that have ever lived, and portrays
some of the darkest scenes that have ever been enacted, to meet at times and
characters, like those we have just passed in review, helps to make us forget
the wickedness and worthlessness on which the mind is apt to dwell
disproportionately, if not exclusively. All is not dark in the scene we are
surveying; beams of glory break in through the deep shadows. Majestic and kingly
spirits pass across the stage, whose deeds and renown shall live when the little
and the base among their fellows, who labored to defame their character and to
extinguish their fame, have gone down into oblivion, and passed for ever from
the knowledge of the world. Thus it is that the good overcomes the evil, and
that the heroic long survives the worthless. The example of great men has a
creative power: they reproduce, in the ages that come after, their own likeness,
and enrich the world with men cast in their own lofty and heroic mould. Humanity
is thus continually receiving seeds of greatness into its bosom, and the world
is being led onwards to that high platform where its Maker has destined that it
shall ultimately stand.
CHAPTER 5
Back to
Top
THE GUISES, AND THE INSURRECTION OF
AMBOISE.
Francis II—Pupilage of the King—The Guises Masters of
France—Their Tool, the Mob—Chambres Ardentes —Wrecking —Odious Slanders —
Confiscation of Huguenot Estates—Retribution— Conspiracy of Amboise—Its
Failure—Executions — Tragedies on the Loire — Carrier of Nantes Renews these
Tragedies in 1790—Progress of Protestantism— Condemnation of Conde—Preparations
for his Execution —Abjuration Test—Death of Francis II—His
Funeral.
Henry II smitten by a sudden blow, has disappeared
from the scene. Francis II is on the throne of France. The Protestants are
fondly cherishing the hope that with a change of men will come a change of
measures, and that they have seen the dawn of better times. "Alas! under the
reign of this monarch," says Beza, "the rage of Satan broke out beyond all
former bounds."[1] No sooner had Henry
breathed his last, than the Queen-mother and the two Guises carried the young
king to the Louvre, and, installing him there, admitted only their own partisans
to his presence. Now it was that the star of the Guises rose proudly into the
ascendant. The duke assumed the command of the army; the cardinal, head of the
Church, took also upon him the charge of the finances—thus the two brothers
parted between them the government of France. Francis wore the crown; a sort of
general superintendence was allowed to the Queen-mother; but it was the Guise
and not the Valois that governed the country.[2]
One of the last
acts of Henry II had been to arrest Counselor Du Bourg and issue a commission
for his trial. One of the first acts of the son was to renew that commission. Du
Bourg, shut up in his iron cage, and fed on bread and water, was nevertheless
continually singing psalms, which he sometimes accompanied on the lute. His
trial ended in his condemnation as a heretic, and he was first strangled and
then burned in the Place de Greve. His high rank, his many accomplishments, and
his great character for uprightness fixed the eyes of all upon his stake, and
made his death serviceable in no ordinary degree to the cause of
Protestantism.[3]
The power of the
Guises, now in full blossom, was wholly put forth in the extirpation of heresy.
Their zeal in this good work was not altogether without alloy. "Those of the
religion," as the Protestants were termed, were not less the enemies of the
House of Guise than of the Pope, and to cut them off was to consolidate their
own power at the same time that they strengthened the foundations of the Papacy.
To reclaim by argument men who had fallen into deadly error was not consonant
with the habits of the Guises, scarcely with the habits of the age. The sword
and the fanatical mob were their quickest and readiest weapons, and the only
ones in which they had any confidence. They were the masters of the king's
person; they carried him about from castle to castle; they took care to gratify
his tastes; and they relieved him of all the cares of government, for which his
sickly body, indolent disposition, and weak intellect so thoroughly indisposed
him.
While the monarch lived in this inglorious pupilage, the Guises
appended his seal to whatever edict it pleased them to indite. In the Treaty of
Cateau Cambresis, our readers will remember, there was a special clause binding
the late king to exert himself to the utmost of his power to extirpate heresy.
Under pretense of executing that treaty, the Guises fulminated several new and
severe edicts against the Reformed. Their meetings were forbidden on pain of
death, without any other form of judgment, and informers were promised half the
forfeitures. Other rewards were added to qnicken their diligence. The
commissaries of the various wards of Paris were commanded to pay instant
attention to the informations lodged before them by the spies, who were
continually on the search, and the Lieutenant-Criminal was empowered by letters
patent to judge without appeal, and execute without delay, those brought before
him. And the vicars and cures were set to work to thunder excommunication and
anathema in their parishes against all who, knowing who among their neighbors
were Lutherans, should yet refrain from denouncing them to the authorities.[4]
The Protestant
Church in Paris in this extremity addressed the Queen-mother, Catherine de
Medici. A former interview had inspired the members of that Church with the hope
that she was disposed to pursue a moderate policy. They had not yet learned with
what an air of sincerity, and even graciousness, the niece of Clement VII could
cover her designs — how bland she could look while cherishing the most deadly
purpose. They implored Catherine to interpose and stay the rigor of the
government, and, with a just and sagacious foresight, which the centuries since
have amply justified, they warned her that "if a stop was not speedily put to
those cruel proceedings, there was reason to fear lest people, provoked by such
violences, should fall into despair, and break forth into civil commotions,
which of course would prove the ruin of the kingdom: that these evils would not
come frets those who lived under their direction, from whom she might expect a
perfect submission and obedience; but that the far greater number were of those
who, knowing only the abuses of Popery, and having not as yet submitted to any
ecclesiastical discipline, could not or would not bear persecution: that they
had thought proper to give this warning to her Majesty, that if any mischief
should happen it might not be put to their account."[5] It suited the Queen-mother
to interpret the warning of the Protestants, among whom were Coligny and other
nobles, as a threat; and the persecution, instead of abating, grew hotter every
day.[6]
We have already
related the failure of the priests and the Sorbonne to establish the Inquisition
in Paris. Paul IV, whose fanaticism had grown in his old age into frenzy, had
forwarded a bull for that purpose, but the Parliament put it quietly aside. The
project was renewed by the Guises, and if the identical forms of the Spanish
tribunal were not copied in the courts which they succeeded in erecting, a
procedure was adopted which gained their end quite as effectually. These courts
were styled Chambres Ardentes, nor did their name belie their terrible office,
which was to dispatch to the flames all who appeared before them accused of the
crime of heresy. They were presided over by three judges or inquisitors, and,
like the Spanish Court, they had a body of spies or familiars in their
employment, who were continually on the hunt for victims. The sergeants of the
Chatelet, the commissaries of the various quarters of Paris, the officers of the
watch, the city guard, and the vergers and beadles of the several ecclesiastical
jurisdictions—a vast body of men—were all enjoined to aid the spies of the
Chambres Ardentes, by day or night.[7] These ruffians made
domiciliary visits, pried into all secrets, and especially put their ingenuity
on the rack to discover the Conventicle. When they succeeded in surprising a
religious meeting, they fell on its members with terrible violence, maltreating
and sometimes murdering them, and those unable to escape they dragged to prison.
These miscreants were by no means discriminating in their seizures; they must
approve their diligence to their masters by furnishing their daily tale of
victims. Besides, they had grudges to feed, and enmities to avenge, and their
net was thrown at times over some who had but small acquaintance with the
Gospel. A certain Mou-chares, or Mouchy, became the head of a band who made it
their business to apprehend men in the act of eating flesh on Friday, or
violating some other equally important command of the Church. This man has
transmitted his name and office to our day in the term mouchard, a spy of the
police. The surveillance of Mouchares' band was specially exercised over the
Faubourg St. Germain, called, from the number of the Reformed that lived in it,
"the Little Geneva." A hostelry in this quarter, at which the Protestants from
Geneva and Germany commonly put up, was assailed one Friday by Mouchares' men.
They found the guests to the number of sixteen at table. The Protestants drew
their swords, and a scuffle ensued. Mouchares' crew was driven off, but
returning reinforced, they sacked the house, dragged the landlord and his family
to prison, and in order to render them odious to the mob, they carried before
them a larded capon and a piece of raw meat.[8]
The footsteps of
these wretches might be traced in the wreckings of furniture, in the pillage and
ruins which they left behind them, fit those quarters of Paris which were so
unfortunate as to be visited by them. "Nothing was to be seen in the streets,"
says Beza, describing the violences of those days, "but soldiers carrying men
and women, and persons of all ages and every rank, to prison. The streets were
so encumbered with carts loaded with household furniture, that it was hardly
possible to pass. The houses were abandoned, having been pillaged and sacked, so
that Paris looked like a city taken by storm. The poor had become rich, and the
rich poor. What was more pitiable still was to see the little children, whose
parents had been imprisoned, famishing at the doors of their former homes, or
wandering through the streets crying piteously for bread, and no man giving it
to them, so odious had Protestantism become to the Parisians. Still more to
inflame the populace, at the street-corners certain persons in priests' habits
barangered the crowd, telling them that those heretics met together to feast
upon children's flesh, and to commit all kinds of impurity after they had eaten
a pig instead of the Paschal lamb. The Parliament made no attempt to stop these
outrages and crimes."[9] Nor were these violences
confined to the capital; the same scenes were enacted in many other cities, as
Poictiers, Toulouse, Dijon, Bordeaux, Lyons, Aix, and other places of
Languedoc.[10]
This terror, which
had so suddenly risen up in France, struck many Romanists as well as Protestants
with affright. Some Popish voices joined in the cry that was now raised for a
moderate Reform; but instead of Reform came new superstitions. Images of the
Virgin were set up at the corners of streets, tapers were lighted, and persons
stationed near on pretense of singing hymns, but in reality to watch the
countenance of the passer-bys. If one looked displeased, or if he refused to
uncover to the Virgin, or if he did not drop a coin into the box for defraying
the cost of the holy candle that was kept buring before "our Lady," the cry of
heretic was raised, and the obnoxious individual was straightway surrounded by
the mob, and if not torn to pieces on the spot, was carried off to the prison of
the Chatelet. The apprehensions were so numerous that the prisons were filled to
overflow, and the trials of the incarcerated had to be hurried through to make
room for fresh victims. The cells emptied in the morning were filled before
night. "It was one vast system of terror," says Felice, "in which even the
shadow of justice was no longer visible."[11]
No arts were
neglected by the Guises and the priests to maintain at a white heat the
fanaticism of the masses, on which their power to a large extent was based. If
any public calamity happened—if a battle was lost, if the crops were destroyed
by hail-storms, or if a province or city was ravaged by disease—"Ah!" it was
said, "see what judgments these heretics are bringing on France!" Odious
calumnies were put in circulation against those of the "religion." To escape the
pursuit of the spies by whom on all sides they were beset, the Reformed sought
for retreats yet more secret in which to assemble — the darkest alley in city,
the gloomiest recess of forest, the most savage ravine of wilderness. "Ah!" said
their enemies, "they seek the darkness to veil their monstrous and unnatural
wickedness from the light of heaven and from the eyes of men." It was the story
of pagan times over again. The long-buried calumny of the early persecutor was
raked up from old histories, and flung at the French Protestant. Even the
Cardinal of Lorraine was mean enough to have recourse to these arts. His own
unchaste life was no secret, yet he had the effrontery to advance, not
insinuations merely, but open charges against ladies of illustrious rank, and of
still more illustrious virtue — ladies whose lives were a rebuke of the
profligacy with which his lawn was be-spotted and bemired. The cardinal knew how
pure was the virtue which he labored to blacken. Not so the populace. They
believed these men and women to be the atheists and monsters which they had been
painted as being, and they thought that in massacring and exterminating them,
they were cleansing France from what was at once a defilement of the earth, and
a provocation of Heaven.
Avarice came to the aid of bigotry. Not a few of
the Reformed were persons of position and property, and in their case
confmcation of goods was added to loss of life. Their persecutors shared their
estates among them, deeming them doubtless a lawful prize for their orthodox
zeal; and thus the purification of the kingdom, and the enriching of the court
and its myrmidons, went on by equal stages. The history of these manors and
lands cannot in every case be traced, but it is known that many of them remained
in possession of the families which now appropriated them till the great day of
reckoning in 1789, and then the wealth that had been got by confiscation and
injnstice went as it had come. Indeed, in perusing the era of Francis II we seem
to be reading beforehand the history of the times of the Great Revolution. The
names of persons and parties changed, the same harrowing tale will suit both
periods. The machinery of injustice and oppression, first constructed by the
Guises, was a second time set a-working under Danton and Robespierre. Again is
seen a Reign of Terror; again are crowds of spies; again are numberless
denunciations, with all their terrible accompaniments—prison cells emptied in
the morning to be filled before night, tribunals condemning wholesale, the axe
incessantly at work, a triumphant tyranny wielding the mob as its tool,
confiscations on a vast scale, and a furious political fanaticism madly driving
the nation into civil war.
It was evident that a crisis was approaching.
The king was a captive in the hands of the Guises. The laws were not
administered—wrong and outrage stalked defiantly through the kingdom; and to
complain was to draw upon oneself the punishment which ought to have visited the
acts of which one complained. None were safe except the more bigoted of the
Roman Catholics, and the rabble of the great cities, the pliant tools of the
oppressor. Men began to ask one another, "What right have these strangers from
Lorraine to keep the king a captive, and to treat France like a conquered
country? Let us hurl the usurpers from power, and restore the government to its
legitimate channels." This led to what has been called the "Conspiracy of
Amboise."
This movement, in its first origin, was entirely political. It
was no more formed in the interest of the Reformed religion than of the Popish
faith. It was devised in the interests of France, the emancipation of which from
a tyrannous usurpation was its sole aim. It was promoted by both Roman Catholics
and Protestants, because both were smarting from the oppression of the Guises.
The testimony of Davila, which is beyond suspicion, is full to this effect, that
the plot was not for the overthrow of the royal house, but for the liberation of
the king and the authority of the laws.[12] The judgment of the German
and Swiss pastors was asked touching the lawfulness of the enterprise. Calvin
gave his voice against it, foreseeing "that the Reformation might lose, even if
victorious, by becoming in France a military and political party."[13] Nevertheless, the majority
of the pastors approved the project, provided a prince of the blood were willing
to take the lead, and that a majority of the estates of the nation gave it their
sanction. Admiral de Coligny stood aloof from it. It was resolved to proceed in
the attempt. The first question was, Who should be placed at the head of the
movement? The King of Navarre was the first prince of the blood; but he was too
apathetic and too inconstant to bear the weight of so great an affair. His
brother, the Prince of Conde, was believed to have the requisite talents, and he
was accordingly chosen as the chief of the enterprise. It was judged advisable,
however, that he should meanwhile keep himself out of sight, and permit Godfrey
du Barry, Lord of La Renaudie, to be the ostensible leader.[14] Renaudie was a Protestant
gentleman of broken fortunes, but brave, energetic, and able.
Entering
with prodigious zeal into the affair, Renaudie, besides travelling over France,
visited England,[15] and by his activity and
organizing skill, raised a little army of 400 horse and a body of foot, and
enlisted not fewer than 200 Protestant gentlemen in the business. The
confederates met at Nantes, and the 10th of March, 1560, was chosen as the day
to begin the execution of their project. On that day they were to march to the
Castle of Blois, where the king was then residing, and posting their soldiers in
the woods around the castle, an unarmed deputation was to crave an audience of
the king, and present, on being admitted into the presence, two requests, one
for liberty of worship, and the other for the dismissal of the Guises. If these
demands were rejected, as they anticipated they would be, they would give the
signal, their men-at-arms would rush in, they would arrest the Guises, and place
the Prince of Conde at the head of the government. The confederates had taken an
oath to hold inviolable the person of the king. The secret, though entrusted to
thousands, was religiously kept till it was on the very eve of execution. A
timorous Protestant, M. d'Avenelles, an attorney in Paris, revealed it to the
court just at the last moment.[16]
The Guises, having
come to the knowledge of the plot, removed to the stronger Castle of Amboise,
carrying the king thither also. This castle stood upon a lofty rock, which was
washed by the broad stream of the Loire. The insurgents, though disconcerted by
the betrayal of their enterprise, did not abandon it, nevertheless they
postponed the day of execution from the 10th to the 16th of
March.
Renaudie was to arrive in the neighborhood of Amboise on the eve
of the appointed day. Next morning he was to send his troops into the town, in
small bodies, so as not to attract notice; he himself was to enter at noon. One
party of the soldiers were to seize the gates of the citadel, and arrest the
duke and the cardinal; this done, they were to hoist a signal on the top of the
tower, and the men-at-arms, hidden in the neighboring woods, would rush in and
complete the revolution.[17]
But what of the
king while these strange events were in progress? Glimpses of his true
condition, which was more that of a captive than a monarch, at times dawned upon
him. One day, bursting into tears, he said to his wife's uncles, "What have I
done to my people that they hate me so? I would like to hear their complaints
and their reasons I hear it said that people are against you only. I wish you
could be away from here for a time, that we might see whether it is you or I
that they are against." The men to whom he had made this touching appeal gruffly
replied, "Do you then wish that the Bourbon should triumph over the Valois?
Should we do as you desire, your house would speedily be rooted out."[18]
We return to
affairs outside the walls of Amboise. Among those to whom the secret was
entrusted was a Captain Lignieres, who repairing to Amboise revealed the whole
matter to the Queen-mother. He made known the names of the confederates, the
inns at which they were to lodge, the roads by which they were to march on
Amboise—in short, the whole plan of the assault. The Guises instantly took their
measures for the security of the town. They changed the king's guards, built up
the gate of the city-wall, and dispatched troops to occupy the neighboring
towns. Renaudie, surrounded as he was advancing by forced marches to Amboise,
fell, fighting bravely, while his followers were cut in pieces, or taken
prisoners. Another body of troops under Baron de Castelnau was overpowered, and
their leader, deeming farther resistance useless, surrendered on a written
promise that his own life and that of his soldiers should be spared.
The
insurgents were now in the power of the Guises, and their revenge was in
proportion to their former terror, and that had been great. The market-place of
the town of Amboise was covered with scaffolds. Fast as the axe and the gallows
could devour one batch of victims, another batch was brought out to be
dispatched in like manner. Crowding the windows of the palace were the Cardinal
of Lorraine and the duke, radiant with victory; the ladies of the court,
including the Scottish Mary Stuart, in their gayest attire; the young king and
his lords, all feasting their eyes on the terrible seenes which were being
enacted in front of the palace. The blood of those that fell by the axe
overflowed the scaffolds, filled the kennels, and poured in rushing torrents to
the Loire.[19] That generous blood, now
shed like water, would in after-years have enriched France with chivalry and
virtue. Not fewer than 1,200 persons perished at this time. Four dismal weeks
these tragedies were continued. At last the executioners grew weary, and
bethought them of a more summary way of dispatching their victims. They tied
their hands and feet, and flung them into the Loire. The stream went on its way
with its ghastly freight, and as it rolled past corn-field and vineyard, village
and city, it carried to Tours and Nantes, and other towns, the first horrifying
news of the awful tragedies proceeding at Amboise. Castelnau and his companions,
despite the promise on which they had surrendered, shared the fate of the other
prisoners. One of the gentlemen of his company, before bowing his head to the
axe, dipped his hands in the blood of his already butchered comrades, and
holding them up to heaven, exclaimed, "Lord, behold the blood of thy children
unjustly slain; thou wilt avenge it."[20] That appeal went up to the
bar of the great Judge; but the answer stood over for 230 years. With the
Revolution of 1789, came Carrier of Nantes, a worthy successor of the Cardinal
of Lorraine, and then it was seen that the cry had been heard at the great bar
to which it ascended. On the banks of the same river did this man enact, in the
name of liberty, the same horrible butcheries which the cardinal had perpetrated
in the name of religion. A second time did the Loire roll onward a river of
blood, bearing on its bosom a ghastly burden of corpses.
When we look
down on France in 1560, and see her rivers reddening the seas around her coasts,
and when again we look down upon her in 1790, and see the same portentous
spectacle renewed, we seem to hear the angel of the waters saying, "Thou art
righteous, O Lord, who art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged
thus: for they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given
them blood to drink, for they are worthy. And I heard another angel out of the
altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments."[21]
The Reformation
continued to advance in the face of all this violence.[22] "There were many even
among the prelates," Davila tells us, "that inclined to Calvin's doctrine."[23] The same year that
witnessed the bloody tragedy we have just recorded, witnessed also the
establishment of the public celebration of Protestant worship in France. Up till
this time the Reformed had held their assemblies for worship in secret; they met
over-night, and in lonely and hidden places; but now the very increase of their
numbers forced them into the light of day. When whole cities, and well-nigh
entire provinces, had embraced the Reformation, it was no longer possible for
the confessors of Protestant truth to bury themselves in dens and forests. Why
should the population of a whole town go out of its gates to worship? why not
assemble in its own cathedrals, seeing in many places there were not now Papists
to occupy them? The very calumnies which their enemies invented and circulated
against them compelled them to this course. They would worship in open day, and
with open doors, and see who should dare accuse them of seeking occasion for
unnatural and abominable crimes. But this courageous course on the part of the
Reformed stung the Guises to madness, and their measures became still more
violent. They got together bands of ruffians, and sent them into the provinces
where the Calvinists abounded, with a commission to slay and burn at their
pleasure. The city of Tours was almost entirely Protestant. So, too, were
Valence and Romans. The latter towns were surprised, the principal inhabitants
hanged, and the Protestant pastors beheaded with a label on their breasts,
"These are the chiefs of the rebels."[24] These barbarities, as
might have been expected, provoked reprisals. Some of the less discreet of the
Protestants made incursions, at the head of armed bands, into Provence and
Dauphine. Entering the cathedrals, and turning the images and priests to the
door, they celebrated Protestant worship in them, sword in hand; and when they
took their departure, they carried with them the gold and silver utensils which
had been used in the Romish service.
Such was now the unhappy condition
of France. The laws were no longer administered. The land, scoured by armed
bands, was full of violence and terror, of rapine and blood. The anarchy was
complete; the cup of the ruler's oppression, and the people's suffering, was
full and running over.
The Guises, intent on profiting to the utmost from
the suppression of the "Conspiracy of Amboise," pushed hard to crush their
rivals before they had time to rally, or set on foot a second and, it might be,
more formidable insurrection. In order to this, they resolved on two
measures—first, to dispatch the Prince of Conde, the head of the Protestant
party; and, secondly, to compel every man and woman in the kingdom to abjure
Protestantism. In prosecution of the first, having lured the prince to Orleans,
they placed him under arrest, and brought him to trial for complicity in the
Amboise Conspiracy. As a matter of course he was condemned, and the Guises were
now importuning the king to sign the death-warrant and have him executed. The
moment Conde's head had fallen on the scaffold, they would put in force the
second measure—the abjuration, namely. A form of abjuration was already drawn
up, and it was resolved that on Christmas Day the king should present it to all
the princes and officers of the court for their signature; that the queen, in
like manner, should present it to all her ladies and maids of honor; the
chancellor to all the deputies of Parliament and judges; the governors of
provinces to all the gentry; the cures to all their parishioners; and the heads
of families to all their dependents. The alternative of refusing to subscribe
the abjuration oath was to be immediate execution. The cardinal, who loved to
mingle a little grim pleasantry with his bloody work, called this cunning device
of his "the Huguenot's rat-trap."[25]
All was prospering
according to the wish of the government. The scaffold was already erected on
which Conde was to die. The executioner had been summoned, and was even now in
Orleans. The abjuration formula was ready to be presented to all ranks and every
individual the moment the prince had breathed his last; the year would not close
without seeing France covered with apostasies or with martyrdoms. Verily, it
seemed as if the grave of the French Reformation were dug.
When all was
lost, as it appeared, an unseen finger touched this complicated web, woven with
equal cruelty and cunning, and in an instant its threads were rent—the snare was
broken. The king was smitten with a sudden malady in the head, which defied the
skill of all his physicians. The Guises were thrown into great alarm by the
illness of the king. "Surely," said the duke to the physicians, "your art can
save one who is only fit the flower of his age." And when told that the royal
patient would not live till Easter, he stormed exceedingly, and accused the
physicians of killing the king, and of having taken the money of the heretics
for murdering him. His brother, the cardinal, betook him to the saints of
Paradise. He ordered prayers and processions for his recovery. But, despite the
prayers that ascentled in the temples—despite the images and relics that were
carried in solemn procession through the streets—the king rapidly sank, and
before Conde's death-warrant could be signed, or the abjuration test presented
for subscription, Francis II had breathed his last.[26]
The king died (5th
December, 1560) at the age of seventeen, after a reign of only as many months.
The courtiers were too busy making suit for their places, or providing for their
safety, to care for the lifeless body of the king. It lay neglected on the bed
on which he had expired. Yesterday they had cringed and bowed before him, today
he was nothing more to them than so much carrion. A few days thereafter we see a
funeral procession issuing from the gates of Orleans, and proceeding along the
road to the royal vaults at St. Denis. But what a poor show! What a meager
following!
We see none of the usual pageantry of grief—no heralds; no
nodding plumes, no grandees of State in robes of mourning; we hear no boom of
cannon, no toiling of passing bell—in short, nothing to tell us that it is a
king who is being borne to the tomb. A blind bishop and two aged domestics make
up the entire train behind the funeral car.[27] It was in this fashion
that Francis II was carried to his grave.
CHAPTER 6
Back to
Top
CHARLES IX—THE
TRIUMVIRATE—COLLOQUY AT POISSY.
Mary Stuart—Charles IX—Catherine de
Medici Regent—Meeting of States-General—Chancellor de l'Hopital on
Toleration—Speeches of the Deputies—The Church's Advocate calls for the
Sword—Sermons at Fontainebleau—The Triumvirate—Debt of France—Colloquy at
Poissy—Roman Members—Protestant Deputies—Beza—His Appearance—Points of
Difference—Commotion in the Conference— Cardinal of Lorraine's Oration—End of
Colloquy—Lesson—Impulse to Protestantism— Preaching of Pierre Viret—Dogmas and
their Symbols—Huguenot Iconoclasts.
We have seen Francis II carried to the tomb with no
more pomp or decency than if, instead of the obsequies of a king, it had been
the funeral of a pauper. There followed a sudden shifting of the scenes at
court. The day of splendor that seemed to be opening to Mary Stuart was suddenly
overcast. From the throne of France she returned to her native country, carrying
with her to the Scottish shore her peerless beauty, her almost umivalled power
of dissembling, and her hereditary and deeply cherished hatred of the
Reformation. To her uncles, the Guises, the death of the king brought a not less
sad reverse of fortune. Though they still retained their offices and dignities,
they were no longer the uncontrolled masters of the State, as when Francis
occupied the throne and their niece sat by his side.
But in the room of
the Guises there stood up one not less the enemy of the Gospel, and whose rule
was not less prolific of woes to France. Catherine de Medici was now supreme in
the government; her day had at last arrived. If her measures were less
precipitate, and her violence less open, her craft was deeper than that of the
Guises, and her stroke, if longer delayed, was the more deadly when it fell. Her
son, Charles IX, who now occupied the throne, was a lad of only nine and a half
years; and, as might have been expected in the case of such a mother and such a
son, Charles wore the crown, but Catherine governed the kingdom. The sudden
demise of Francis had opened the prison doors to Conde. Snatching him from a
scaffold, if, restored him to liberty. As a prince of the blood, the Regency of
France, during the minority of Charles, by right belonged to him; but Catherine
boldly put him aside, and made herself be installed in that high office. In this
act she gave a taste of the rigor with which she meant to rule. Still she did
not proceed in too great haste. Her caution, which was great, served as a bridle
to her ambition, and the Huguenots,[1] as they began to be
called, had now a breathing-space.
The Queen-mother fortified herself on
the side of the Guises by recalling the Constable Montmorency, and installing
him in all his dignities and offices. The next event of importance was the
meeting of the States-General at Orleans (December 13th, 1560), a few days after
Charles IX had ascended the throne. The assembly was presided over by the
Chancellor Michel de l'Hopital, a man learned in the law, revered on the
judgment-seat for the wisdom and equity of his decisions, and tolerant beyond
the measure of his times. The words, few but weighty, with which he opened the
proceedings, implied a great deal more than they expressed. The Church, he said,
that great fountain of health or of disease to a nation, had become corrupt.
Reformation was needed. "Adorn yourselves," said he to the clergy, "but let it
be with virtues and morality. Attack your foes, by all means, but let it be with
the weapons of charity, prayer, and persuasion."[2] Enlightened counsels
these, which needed only wisdom in those to whom they were addressed, to work
the cure of many of the evils which afflicted France.
The city of
Bordeaux had sent an orator to the Parliament. Lying remote from the court, and
not domineered over by the Popish rabble as Paris was, Bordeaux breathed a
spirit more friendly to liberty and the Reformation than did the capital, and
its deputy was careful to express the sentiments entertained by those who had
commissioned him to represent them in this great assembly of the nation. "Three
great vices," he said, "disfigure the clergy—ignorance, avarice, and luxury;"
and after dwelling at some length on each, he concluded by saying that if the
ministers of religion would undertake to reform themselves, he would undertake
to reform the nation. The spokesman of the nobility, the Lord of Rochefort, next
rose to express the sentiments of the body he represented. His words were not
more palatable to the clergy than had been those of the speakers who preceded
him. He complained that the course of justice was obstructed by the interference
of the priests. He did not know which was the greater scandal, or the source of
greater misery to the country — the prodigious wealth of the clergy, or the
astounding ignorance of their flocks. And he concluded by demanding "churches"
for the "gentlemen of the religion."
Thus all the lay speakers in the
States-General united as one man in arraigning the Roman Church as pre-eminently
the source of the many evils which afflicted France. They all with one voice
demanded that the clergy should reform their doctrine, amend their lives,
moderate the magnificence and luxury in which they lived, and laying aside their
arrogance and bigotry, should labor to instruct their flocks, and to reclaim
those who had gone astray, not with the knife and the faggot, but with the
weapons of truth and reason.
It was now the turn of the clergy to be
heard through the oracle whom they had selected—Jean Quintin, Professor of Canon
Law. He had undertaken the cause of an institution laden with abuses, and now
arraigned at the bar of the nation, as the cause of the manifold distractions
and oppressions under which the country groaned. He took the responsibility
lightly. He began by expressing his regret—a regret, we doubt not, perfectly
sincere —that a most unwonted and dangerous innovation had been practiced in
permitting the nobility and commons to address the assembly. The Church, he
said, was the mouth of the States-General; and had that mouth, and no other,
been permitted to address them, they would have been spared the pain of
listening to so many hard things of the Church, and so many smooth things of
heresy. The heretics, said the orator, had no other Gospel than revolution; and
this pestiferous Gospel admitted of no remedy but the sword. Were not all the
men who had embraced this Gospel under the excommunication of the Church? and
for what end had the sword been put into the hand of the king, if not to execute
the deserved vengeance to which "the Church" had adjudged those who had so
fatally strayed? And, turning to the young king, he told him that his first and
most sacred duty, as a magistrate, was to defend the Church, and to root out her
enemies. Coligny, who sat facing the speaker, started to his feet on hearing
this atrocious proposal, which doomed to extermination a third of the population
of France. He demanded an apology from the speaker. Quintin could doubtless
plead the authority of canon law, and many a melancholy precedent to boot, for
what he had said; but he had overshot the mark. He found no response in that
assembly; even Catherine de Medici felt the speech to be an imprudent one, and
the priests, whatever their secret wishes, durst not openly support their
orator; and so Quintin was compelled to apologize. Sickening under his
mortification, he died three days thereafter.
Something had been gained
by the meeting of the States-General. The priest-party had suffered a rebuff;
Catherine de Medici had felt the pulse of the nation, and was more convinced
than ever that the course she had resolved to steer was the wise one. Her
supreme object was power; and she would best attain it by being on good terms
with both parties. She opened the halls of Fontainebleau to the Protestant
preachers, and she and her maids of honor were to be seen at times waiting with
edifying seriousness upon the sermons of the Reformed pastors. So far did the
Queen Regent carry her favors to the Protestants, that the Roman Catholics took
alarm, fearing that she had gone over, not in seeming only, but in reality, to
the "religion." There was little cause for their alarm. Catherine had no
intention of becoming a Huguenot. She was merely holding the balance between the
two parties—making each weaken the. other—judging this to be the most effectual
way of strengthening herself.
These favors to the Protestants roused the
slumbering zeal of the Romanists. Now arose the Triumvirate. The party so named,
which makes some figure in the history of the times, was formed for the defense
of the old religion, its members being the Duke of Guise, the Constable
Mont-morency, and the Marshal St. Andre. These three men had little in common.
The bond which held them together was hatred of the new faith, the triumph of
which, they foresaw, would strip them of their influence and possessions. There
had been a prodigal waste of the public money, and a large confiscation of the
estates of the Protestants under the two former reigns; these three men had
carried off the lion's share of the spoil; and should Protestantism win the day,
they would, in modern phrase, have to recoup, and this touched at once their
honor and their purses. As regards the Guises, their whole influence hung upon
the Roman Church; her destruction, therefore, would be their destruction. As
respects the Constable Montmorency, he prided himself on being the first
Christian in France. He was descended in a direct line from St. Louis; and a
birth so illustrious—not to speak of the fair fame of his saintly
ancestors—
imposed upon him the duty of defending the old faith, or if
that were impossible, of perishing with it. He was incapable of defending it by
argument; but he had a sword, and it would ill become him to let it rust in its
scabbard, when the Church needed its service. As regards Marshal St. Andre, the
least influential member of the Triumvirate, he was a noted gourmand, a
veritable Lucullus, to whom there was nothing in life half so good as a
well-furnished table. Marshal St. Andre foresaw that should Roman Catholicism go
down in France, he would not only lose his Church—he would lose his dinner. The
first might be borne, but the latter was not to be thought of. These men had
formerly been at deadly feud among themselves; but now they resolved to
sacrifice their differences upon the altar of their country, and to unite
together in this holy league for the defense of their religion and their
estates. The Triumvirate will again come before us: it has left its mark on the
history of France.
The States-General again assembled in the end of 1561.
The first thing that came under its notice was the financial state of the
kingdom. The national debt amounted to £48,000,000, and bade fair greatly to
exceed that sum in a short time, for the expenditure was a long way in excess of
the revenue.
What was to be done? A proposal was made that anticipated
the measure which was carried out in France in 1789, and adopted long after that
date in all the countries in which Roman Catholicism is the established
religion. The speaker who made the proposal in question, laid down the principle
that the ecclesiastical property belongs to the nation; that the clergy are
merely its administrators; and founding on that principle, he proposed that the
estates of the Church should be put up for sale, and the proceeds divided as
follows:—one-third to go to the support of the Church; one-third to the payment
of the national debt; and one-third to the revenues of the crown, to be applied,
of course, to national uses. In this way it was hoped the financial difficulty
would be got over; but the great difficulty— the religious one—lay behind; how
was it to be got over?
It was agreed that a Council should be summoned;
but it augured ill for the era of peace it was to inaugurate, that men disputed
regarding its name before it had assembled. The priests strongly objected to its
being called a Council. That would imply that the Protestant pastors were
Christian ministers as well as themselves, entitled to meet them on terms of
equality, and that the Reformed bodies were part of the Church as well as the
Roman Catholics. The difficulty was got over by the device of styling the
approaching assembly a Colloquy. The two parties had a different ideal before
their mind. That of the Romantats was, that the Protestants came to the bar to
plead, and to have their cause judged by the Church. That of the Protestants
was, that the two parties were to debate on equal terms, that the Bible should
be the supreme standard, and that the State's authorities should decide without
appeal. Knox, in Scotland, drew the line more justly; framing his creed from the
Bible, he presented it to the Parliament, just a year before this, and asked the
authorities to judge of it, but only for themselves, in order to the withdrawal
from the Roman hierarchy of that secular jurisdiction in which it was vested,
and which it was exercising for the hindrance of the evangel, and for the
destruction of its disciples. The Protestant Church of France had no
Knox.
On September 9th, 1561, this Colloquy—for we must not call it a
Council —assembled at Poissy. On this little town, which lay a few leagues to
the lyest of Paris, were the eyes of Christendom for the moment fixed. Will the
conference now assembling there unite the two religions, and give peace to
France? This issue was as earnestly desired by the Protestant States of Germany
and England, as it was dreaded by the Pope and the King of Spain.
Nothing
was wanting which pomp could give to make the conference a success. The hall in
which it was held was the refectory of the convent at Poissy. There was set a
throne, and on that throne sat the youthful sovereign of France, Charles IX.
Right and left of him were ranged the princes and princesses of the blood, the
great ministers of the crown, and the high lords of the court.[3] Along two sides of the
hall ran a row of benches, and on these sat the cardinals in their scarlet
robes. On the seats below them were a crowd of bishops, priests, and doctors.
The assembly was a brilliant one. Wherever the eye turned, it fell upon the
splendor of official robes, upon the brilliance of rank, upon stars, crosses,
and other insignia of academic distinction or of military achievement. It lacked
the moral majesty, however, which a great purpose, earnestly and sincerely
entertained, only can give. No affluence of embroidered and jeweled attire can
compensate for the absence of a great moral end.
The king rose and said a
few words. Much could not be looked for from a lad of only ten years. The
chancellor, Michel de 'Hopital, followed in a long speech, abounding in the most
liberal and noble sentiments; and had the members of the assembly opened their
ears to these wise counsels, they would have guided its deliberations to a
worthy issue, and made the future of France a happy and glorious one. "Let us
not pre-judge the cause we are met to discuss," said in effect the chancellor,
"let us receive these men as brethren—they are Christians as well as ourselves;
let us not waste time in subtleties, but with all humility proceed to the
Reformation of the doctrine of the Church, taking the Bible as the arbiter of
all our differences." L'Hopital aimed at striking the key-note of the
discussions; but so little were his words in harmony with the sentiments of
those to whom they were addressed, that the speech very nearly broke up the
conference before it had well begun. It called for Reform according to the
Bible. "The Bible is enough," said he; "to this, as to the true rule, we must
appeal for the decision of the doctrine. Neither must we be so averse to the
Reformed, for they are our brethren, regenerated by the same baptism, and
worshipping the same Christ as we do."[4] Straightway there arose a
great commotion among the cardinals and bishops; angry words and violent
gestures bespoke the irritation of their minds; but the firmness of the
chancellor succeeded in calming the storm, and the business was proceeded
with.
The Protestant deputies had not yet been introduced to the
conference. This showed that here all did not meet on equal terms. But now, the
Papal members having taken their seats, and the preliminary speeches being
ended, there was no excuse for longer delaying the admission of the Protestants.
The doors were thrown open, and Theodore Beza, followed by ten Protestant
pastors and twenty-two lay deputies, entered the hall. There was a general
desire that Calvin, then in the zenith of his fame, should have taken part in
the discussions. The occasion was not unworthy of him, and Catherine de Medici
had invited him by letter; but the magistrates of Geneva, unable to obtain
hostages of high rank as pledges of his safety, refused to let him come, and
Theodore Beza was sent in his room. No better substitute could have been found
for the illustrious chief of the Reformation than his distinguished disciple and
fellow-laborer. Beza was a native of Burgnndy, of noble birth; learned,
eloquent, courtly, and of a dignified presence. We possess a sketch of the
personal appearance of this remarkable man by the traveler Fynes Moryson, who
chanced to pass through Geneva in the end of that century. "Here," says he, "I
had great contentment to speak and converse with the reverend Father Theodore
Beza, who was of stature something tall and corpulent, or big-boned, and had a
long thick beard as white as snow. He had a grave senator's countenance, and was
broad-faced, but not fat, and in general, by his comely person, sweet
affability, and gravity, he would have extorted reverence from those that least
loved him."[5]
The Reformed
pastors entered, gravely and simply attired. They wore the usual habits of the
Geneva Church, which offered a striking contrast to the State robes and clerical
vestments in which courtier and cardinal sat arrayed. Unawed by the blaze of
stars, crosses, and various insignia of rank and office which met their gaze,
the deputies bore themselves with a calm dignity, as men who had come to plead a
great cause before a great assembly. They essayed to pass the barrier, and
mingle on equal terms with those with whom they were to confer. But, no; their
place was outside. The Huguenot pastor could not sit side by side with the Roman
bishop. The Reformation must not come nigh the throne of Charles IX and the
hierarchy of the Church. It must be made appear as if it stood at the bar to be
judged. The pastors, though they saw, were too magnanimous to complain of this
studied affront; nor did they refuse on that account to plead a cause which did
not rest on such supports as lofty looks and gorgeous robes.
The moral
majesty of Beza asserted its supremacy, and carried it over all the mock
magnificence of the men who said to him, "Stand afar off, we are holier than
thou." Immediately on entering he fell on his knees, the other deputies kneeling
around him, and in the presence of the assembly, which remained mute and awed,
he offered a short but most impressive prayer that Divine assistance might be
vouchsafed in the discussions now to commence, and that these discussions might
be guided to an issue profitable to the Church of God. Then rising up he made
obeisance to the young monarch, thanking him for this opportunity of defending
the Reformation; and next, turning to the prelates, he besought them to seek
only to arrive at truth. Having thus introduced himself, with a modest yet
dignified courteousness, well fitted to disarm prejudice against himself and his
cause, he proceeded to unfold the leading doctrines of the Reformation. He took
care to dwell on the spirit of loyalty that animated its disciples, well knowing
that the Romanists charged it with being the enemy of princes; he touched
feelingly on the rigors to which his co-religionists had been subjected, though
no fault had been found in them, save in the matters of their God; and then
launching out on the great question which had brought the conference together,
he proceeded with much clearness and beauty of statement, and also with great
depth of argnment, to discuss the great outstanding points between the two
Churches. The speech took the Roman portion of the assembly by surprise. Such
erudition and eloquence they had not expected to find in the advocates of the
Reform; they were not quite the contemptible opponents they had expected to
meet, and they felt that they would do well to look to their own armor. Beza,
having ended, presented on bended knee a copy of the Confession of the French
Protestant Church to the king.
But the orator had not been permitted to
pursue uninterruptedly his argument to its close. In dealing with the
controverted points, Beza had occasion to touch on the Sacrament of the
Eucharist. It was the center of the controversy. The doctrine he maintained on
this head was, in brief, that Christ is spiritually present in the Sacrament,
and spiritually partaken of by the faith of the recipient; but that his body is
not in the elements, but in heaven. If the modest proposal of the Chancellor de
l'Hopital, that the Bible should rule in the discussion, had raised a commotion,
the words of Beza, asserting the Protestant doctrine on the great point at issue
between Rome and the Reformation, evoked quite a storm. First, murmurs were
heard; these speedily grew into a tempest of voices. "He has spoken blasphemy!"
cried some. Cardinal Tournon demanded, anger almost choking his utterance, that
the king should instantly silence Beza, and expel from France men whose very
presence was polluting its soil and imperilling the faith of the "most Christian
king." All eyes were turned upon Catherine de Medici. She sat unmoved amid the
clamor that surrounded her. Her son, Charles IX, was equally imperturbable. The
ruse of the Roman bishops had failed — for nothing else than a ruse could it be,
if the Romanists did not expect the Protestant deputies quietly and without
striking a blow to surrender their whole cause to Rome—and the assembly
by-and-by subsiding into calm, Beza went on with his speech, which he now
pursued without interruption to its close.
The feeling among the bishops
was that of discomfiture, though they strove to hide it under an air of affected
contempt. Beza had displayed an argumentative power, and a range of learning and
eloquence, which convinced them that they had found in him a more formidable
opponent than they expected to encounter. They regreted that the conference had
ever met; they dreaded, above all things, the effect which the reasonings of
Beza might have on the mind of the king. "Would to God," said the Cardinal of
Lorraine, "that Beza had been dumb, or we deaf." But regrets were vain. The
conference had met, Beza had spoken, and there was but one course—Beza must be
answered. They promised a refutation of all he had advanced, in a few
days.
The onerous task was committed to the hands of the Cardinal of
Lorraine. The choice was a happy one. The cardinal was not lacking in ingenuity;
he was, moreover, possessed of some little learning, and a master in address.
Claude d'Espenee, accounted one of the most learned of their doctors, was
appointed to assist him in the way of collecting materials for his answer. On
the 16th of September the Colloquy again met, and the cardinal stood forth
before the assembly and delivered an eloquent oration. He confined himself to
two points—the Church and the Sacrament. "The Church," he said, "was infallibly
guarded from error by the special promise of Christ. True," he said, glancing at
the Protestant members of the Colloquy, "individual Christians might err and
fall out of the communion of the Church, but the Church herself cannot err, and
when any of her children wander they ought to submit themselves to the Pontiff,
who cannot fail to bring them back to the right path, and never can lose it
himself." In proof of this indefectibility of the Church, the cardinal cast
himself upon history, expatiating, as is the wont of Romish controversialists,
upon her antiquity and her advance, pari passu, with the ages in power and
splendor. He painted her as surviving all changes, withstanding the shock of all
revolutions, outlasting dynasties and nations, triumphing over all her enemies,
remaining unbroken by divisions within, unsubdued by violence without, and
apparently as imperishable as the throne of her Divine Founder. So spoke the
cardinal. The prestige that encompasses Rome has dazzled others besides
Romanists, and we may be sure the picture, in the hands of the cardinal, would
lose none of its attractions and illusions. The second point, the Sacrament, did
not admit of the same dramatic handling, and the cardinal contented himself with
a summary of the usual arguments of his Church in favor of transubstantiation.
The orator had not disappointed the expectations formed of him; even a less able
speech would have been listened to with applause by all audience so partial; but
the cheers that greeted Lorraine when he had ended were deafening. "He has
refuted, nay, extinguished Beza," shouted a dozen voices. Gathering round the
king, "That, sire," said they, "is the true faith, which has been handed down
from Clovis; abide in it."
When the noise had a little subsided, Beza
rose and requested permission to reply on the spot. This renewed the confusion.
"The deputies had but one course," insisted the prelates, "they ought to confess
that they were vanquished; and, if they refused, they must be compelled, or
banished the kingdom." But the hour was late; the lay members of the council
were in favor of hearing Beza, and the bishops, being resolved at all hazards
that he should not be heard, broke up the assembly. This may be said to have
been the end of the conferences; for though the sittings were continued, they
were held in a small chamber belonging to the prior; the king was not permitted
to come any more to them; the lay deputies were also excluded; and the debates
degenerated into mere devices on the part of the Romanist clergy to entrap the
Protestants into signing articles craftily drafted and embodying the leading
tenets of the Roman creed. Failing in this, the Cardinal of Lorraine attempted a
characteristic ruse. He wrote to the Governor of Metz, desiring him to send to
him a few divines of the Augsburg Confession, "holding their opinions with great
obstinacy," his design being to set them a-wrangling with the Calvinists on the
points of difference. Arriving at Paris, one of them died of the plague, and the
rest could not be presented in public. The cardinal consequently was left to
manage his little affair himself as best he could. "Do you," said he to Beza,
"like the Lutherans of Germany, admit consubstantiation?" "And do you," rejoined
Beza, "like them, deny transubstantiation?" The cardinal thought to create a
little bad blood between the Protestants of Germany and the Protestants of
France, and so deprive the latter of the assistance which he feared might be
sent them from their co-religionists of the Fatherland. But his policy of
"divide and conquer" did not prosper.[6]
It was clear that
no fair discussion, and no honest adjustment of the controversy on the basis of
truth, had from the first been intended. Nevertheless, the Colloquy had prompted
the inquiry, "Is Romanism simply a corruption of the Gospel, or rather, has it
not changed in the course of the ages into a system alien from and antagonistic
to Christianity, and can there in that case be a possibility of reconciling the
two faiths?" The conference bore fruit also in another direction. It set the
great Chancellor de l'Hopital to work to solve the problem, how the two parties
could live in one country. To unite them was impossible; to exterminate one of
them—Rome's short and easy way—was abhorrent to him. There remained but one
other device—namely, that each should tolerate the other. Simple as this way
seems to us, to the men of the times of L'Hopital, with a few rare exceptions,
it was unthought of and untried, and appeared impossible. But, soon after the
breakdown of Poissy, we find the chancellor beginning to air, though in ungenial
times, his favorite theory—that men might be loyal subjects of the king, though
not of the king's faith, and good members of the nation, though not of the
nation's Church; in short, that difference of religious opinions ought not to
infer exclusion from civil privileges, much less ought it to subject men to
civil penalties.
Another important result of the Colloquy at Poissy, was
that the Reformation stood higher in public estimation. It had been allowed to
justify itself on a very conspicuous stage, and all to whom prejudice had left
the power of judging, were beginning to see that it was not the disloyal and
immoral System its enemies had accused it of being, nor were its disciples the
vicious and monstrous characters which the priests had painted them. A fresh
impulse was given to the movement. Some important towns, and hundreds of
villages, after the holding of the Colloquy, left the communion of Rome. Farel
was told by a pastor "that 300 parishes in the Agenois had put down the mass."
From all quarters came the cry, "Send us preachers!" Farel made occasional tours
into his native France. There arrived from Switzerland another remarkable man to
take part in the work which had received so sudden a development. In October,
1561, Pierre Viret came to Nismes. He had been waylaid on the road, and beaten
almost to death, by those who guessed on what errand he was travelling; and when
he appeared on the scene of his labors, "he seemed," to use his own words, "to
be nothing but a dry skeleton covered with skin, who had brought his bones
thither to be buried." Nevertheless, on the day after his arrival, he preached
to 8,000 hearers. When he showed himself in the pulpit, many among his audience
asked; "What has this poor man come to do in our country? Is he not come to
die?" But when the clear, silvery tones of his voice rang out upon the ear, they
forgot the meager look and diminutive figure of the man before them, and thought
only of what he said. There were an unction and sweetness in his address that
carried captive their hearts. All over the south of France, and more
particularly in the towns of Nismes, Lyons, Montpelier, and Orthez, he preached
the Gospel; and the memory of this eloquent evangelist lingers in those parts to
this day.[7]
Nor was Beza in any
haste to depart, although the conferences which brought him to Paris were at an
end. Catherine de Medici, on whom his learning, address, and courtly bearing had
not failed to make an impression, showed him some countenance, and he preached
frequently in the neighborhood of the capital. These gatherings took place
outside the walls of Paris; the people, to avoid all confusions, going and
returning, going and returning by several gates. In the center were the women;
next came the men, massed in a broad circular column; while a line of sentinels
stationed at intervals kept watch on the outside, lest the fanatical mob of
Paris should throw itself upon the congregation of worshippers.
It was
impossible that a great movement like this, obstructed by so many and so
irritating hindrances, should pursue its course without breaking into occasional
violences. In those parts of France where the whole population had passed over
to Protestantism, the people took possession of the cathedrals, and, as a matter
of course, they cleared out the crucifixes, images, and relics which they
contained. In the eyes of the Protestants these things were the symbols of
idolatry, and they felt that they had only half renounced Romanism while they
retained the signs and symbols of its dogmas. They felt that they had not
honestly put away the doctrine while they retained its exponent. A nation of
philosophers might have been able to distinguish between the idea and its
symbol, and completely to emancipate themselves from the former without
destroying the latter.
They might have said, These things are nothing to
us but so much wood and metal; it is in the idea that the mischief lies, and we
have effectually separated ourselves from it, and the daily sight of these
things cannot bring it back or restore its dominancy over us. But the great mass
of mankind are too little abstract to feel or reason in this way. They cannot
fully emancipate themselves from the idea till its sign has been put away. The
Bible has recognized this feebleness, if one may term it so, of the popular
mind, when it condemned, as in the second commandment, worship by an image, as
the worship of the image, and joining together the belief and the image of the
false gods, stringently commanded that both should be put away. And the
distinctive feeling of the masses in all revolutions, political as well as
religious, has recogized this principle. Nations, in all such cases, have
destroyed the symbols represented. The early Christians broke the idols and
demolished the temples of paganism. In the revolution of 1789, and in every
succeeding revolution in France, the populace demolished the monuments and tore
down the insignia of the former regime. If this is too great a price to pay for
Reformation, that is another thing; but we cannot have Reformation without it.
We cannot have liberty without the loss, not of tyranny only, but its symbols
also; nor the Gospel without the loss of idolatry, substance and symbol. Nor can
these symbols return without the old ideas returning too. Hence Ranke tells us
that the first indication of a reaction against the Reformation in Germany was
"the wearing of rosaries." This may enable us to understand the ardor of the
French iconoclasts of the sixteenth century. Of that ardor we select, from a
multitude of illustrative incidents, the following:—On one occasion, during the
first war of religion, news was brought to Conde and Coligny that the great
Church of St. Croix in Orleans was being sacked. Hurrying to the spot, they
found a soldier mounted on a ladder, busied in breaking an image. The prince
pointed an arquebuse at him. "Menseigneur," said the Huguenot, "have patience
till I have knocked down this idol, and then I will die, if you
please."
CHAPTER 7
Back to
Top
MASSACRE AT VASSY AND
COMMENCEMENT OF THE CIVIL WARS.
Spring-time of French
Protestantism—Edict of January—Toleration of Public Worship—Displeasure of the
Romanists—Extermination—The Duke of Guise—Collects an Army—Massacres the
Protestants of Vassy —The Duke and the Bible — He Enters Paris in Triumph—His
Sword Supreme—Shall the Protestants take up Arms?—Their Justification—
Massacres—Frightful State of France—More Persecuting Edicts— Charlotte
Laval—Coligny sets out for the Wars.
The failure of the Colloquy of Poissy was no calamity
to either Protestantism or the world. Had the young Reform thrown itself into
the arms of the old Papacy, it would have been strangled in the embrace. The
great movement of the sixteenth century, like those of preceding ages, after
illuminating the horizon for a little while, would again have faded into
darkness.
By what means and by what persons the Gospel was spread in
France at this era it is difficult to say. A little company of disciples would
start up in this town, and in that village, and their numbers would go on
increasing, till at last the mass was forsaken, and instead of the priest's
chant there was heard the Huguenot's psalm. The famous potter, Palissy, has
given us in his Memoirs some interesting details concerning the way in which
many of these congregations arose. Some poor but honest citizen would learn the
way of peace in the Bible; he would tell it to his next neighbor; that neighbor
would tell it in his turn; and in a little while a small company of simple but
fervent disciples would be formed, who would meet regularly at the midnight hour
to pray and converse together. Ere their enemies were aware, half the town had
embraced "the religion;" and then, taking courage, they would avow their faith,
and hold their worship in public. As the rich verdure spreads over the earth in
spring, adding day by day a new brightness to the landscape, and mounting ever
higher on the mountain's side, so, with the same silence, and the same beauty,
did the new life diffuse itself throughout France. The sweetness and joy of this
new creation, the inspired Idyll alone can adequately depict — "Lo, the winter
is past, the rain is over and gone: the flowers appear on the earth; the time of
the singing of birds is come, and the voice of the turtle is heard in our land.
The fig-tree putteth forth her green figs, and the vines with the grape give a
good smell."
Like that balmy morning, so exquisitely painted in these
words, that broke on the heathen world after the pagan night, so was the morning
that was now opening on France. Let the words of an eye-witness bear testimony:
—"The progress made by us was such," says Palissy, "that in the course of a few
years, by the time that our enemies rose up to pillage and persecute us, lewd
plays, dances, ballads, gourmandisings, and superfiuities of dress and head-gear
had almost entirely ceased. Scarcely was there any more bad language to be heard
on any side, nor were there any more crimes and scandals. Law-suits greatly
diminished..Indeed, the Religion made such progress, that even the magistrates
began to prohibit things that had grown up under their authority. Thus they
forbade innkeepers to permit gambling or dissipation to be carried on within
their premises, to the enticement of men away from their own homes and
families.
"In those days might be seen on Sundays bands of workpeople
walking abroad in the meadows, in the groves, in the fields, singing psalms and
spiritual songs, and reading to and instructing one another. They might also be
seen girls and maidens seated in groups in the gardens and pleasant places,
singing songs or sacred themes; or boys, accompanied by their teachers, the
effects of whose instructions had already been so salutary that those young
persons not only exhibited a manly bearing, but a manful steadfastness of
conduct. Indeed, these various influences, working one with another, had already
effected so much good that not only had the habits and modes of life of the
people been reformed, but their very countenances seemed to be changed and
improved."[1]
On the 17th of
January, 1562, an Assembly of Notables was convened at St. Germain.[2] This gave the Chancellor
de l'Hopital another opportunity of ventilating his great idea of toleration, so
new to the men of that age. If, said the chancellor, we cannot unite the two
creeds, does it therefore follow that the adherents of the one must exterminate
those of the other? May not both live together on terms of mutual forbearance?
An excommunicated man does not cease to be a citizen. The chancellor, unhappily,
was not able to persuade the Assembly to adopt his wise principle; but though it
did not go all lengths with L'Hopital, it took a step on the road to toleration.
It passed an edict, commonly known as the "Edict of January," "by which was
granted to the Huguenots," says Davila, "a free exercise of their religion, and
the right to assemble at sermons, but unarmed, outside of the cities in open
places, the officers of the place being present and assistant."[3] Till this edict was
granted the Protestants could build no church within the walls of a city, nor
meet for worship in even the open country. Doubtless they sometimes appropriated
a deserted Popish chapel, or gathered in the fields in hundreds and thousands to
hear sermons, but they could plead no statute for this: it was their numbers
solely that made them adventure on what the law did not allow. Now, however,
they could worship in public under legal sanction.
But even this small
scrap of liberty was bestowed with the worst grace, and was lettered by
qualifications and restrictions which were fitted, perhaps intended, to annul
the privilege it professed to grant. The Protestants might indeed worship in
public, but in order to do so they must go outside the gates of their city. In
many towns they were the overwhelming majority: could anything be more absurd
than that a whole population should go outside the walls of its own town to
worship? The edict, in truth, pleased neither party. It conferred too small a
measure of grace to awaken the lively gratitude of the Protestants; and as
regards the Romanists, they grudged the Reformed even this poor crumb of
favor.
Nevertheless, paltry though the edict was, it favored the rapid
permeation of France with the Protestant doctrines. The growth of the Reformed
Church since the death of Henry II was prodigious. At the request of Catherine
de Medici, Beza addressed circular letters at this time to all the Protestant
pastors in France, desiring them to send in returns of the number of their
congregations. The report of Beza, founded on these returns, was that there were
then upwards of 2,150 congregations of the Reformed faith in the kingdom.
Several of these, especially in the great cities, were composed of from 4,000 to
8,000 communicants. The Church at Paris had no less than 20,000 members. As many
as 40,000 would at times convene for sermon outside the gates of the capital.
This multitude of worshippers would divide itself into three congregations, to
which as many ministers preached; with a line of horse and foot, by orders from
Catherine de Medici, drawn round the assembly to protect it from the insults of
the mob.[4] The number of the Reformed
in the provincial cities was in proportion to those of Paris. According to
contemporary estimates of the respective numbers of the two communions, the
Reformed Church had gathered into its bosom from one fourth to one half of the
nation—the former is the probable estimate; but that fourth embraced the flower
of the population in respect of rank, intelligence, and wealth.
The
chiefs of Romanism beheld, with an alarm that bordered on panic, all France on
the point of becoming Lutheran. The secession of so great a kingdom from Rome
would tarnish the glory of the Church, dry up her revenues, and paralyse her
political arm. Nothing must be left undone that could avert a calamity so
overwhelming. The Pope, Philip II of Spain, and the Triumvirate at Paris took
counsel as to the plan to be pursued, and began from this hour to prosecute each
his part, in the great task of rolling back the tide of a triumphant
Huguenotism. They must do so at all costs, or surrender the battle. The Pope
wrote to Catherine de Medici, exhorting her as a daughter of Italy to rekindle
her dying zeal—not so near extinction as the Pope feared—and defend the faith of
her country and her house. The wily Catherine replied, thanking her spiritual
father, but saying that the Huguenots were, meanwhile, too powerful to permit
her to follow his advice, and to break openly with Coligny. The King of Navarre,
the first prince of the blood, was next tampered with. The Romanists knew his
weak point, which was all inordinate ambition to be what nature—by denying him
the requisite talents—had ordained he should not be, a king in his own right,
and not a titular sovereign merely. They offered him a kingdom whose
geographical position was a movable one, lying sometimes in Africa, sometimes in
the island of Sardinia, seeing the kingdom itself was wholly imaginary. They
even flattered him with hopes that he might come to wear the crown of Scotland.
The Pope would dissolve his marriage with Jeanne d'Albret, on the ground of
heresy, and he would then secure him the hand of the young and beautiful Mary
Stuart. Dazzled by these illusions, which he took for realities, the weak,
unstable, unprincipled Antoine de Bourbon passed over to the Roman camp, amid
the loud vauntings of those who knew how worthless, yet how handy, the prize
was.[5]
The way was thus
prepared so far for the execution of bolder measures. The Duke of Guise,
quitting Paris, spent the winter on his family estates in Lorraine, and there,
unobserved, began to collect an army, to cooperate with the troops which the
King of Spain had promised to send him. He hoped to take the field in spring
with such a force as would enable him to root out Huguenotism from the soil of
France, and restore the supremacy of the old faith.
But matters so fell
out that the duke was obliged to begin his campaign sooner than he had intended.
All that winter (1562) the populace of Paris had been kept in a state of great
excitement. The Romanists believed that they were being betrayed. They saw the
Queen-mother, whose present policy it was to play off the Huguenots against the
Triumvirate, favoring the "religion." Then there was the Edict of January,
permitting the free exercise of the Protestant worship. In the eyes of every
Roman Catholic this edict was abomination—a disgrace to the statute-book—a
bulwark to the Huguenots, whom it protected in their psalm-singing and
sermonizing.
The pulpits of Paris thundered against the edict. The
preachers expatiated on the miseries, temporal and eternal, into which it was
dragging down France. They told how they were nightly besieged by souls from
purgatory, dolefully lamenting the cruelty of their relations who no longer
cared to say mass for their deliverance. Visions of hell, moreover, had been
made to them, and they saw it filled with Huguenots. They turned their churches
into arsenals, and provided the mob with arms.[6] The Duke of Guise had been
heard to say that he "would cut the knot of the edict with his sword,"[7] and when the Parisians saw
the Huguenots in thousands, crowding out at the city gates to sermon, and when
they heard their psalm borne back on the breeze, they said, "Would that the duke
were here, we would make these men pipe to another tune." These were
unmistakable signs that the moment for action was come. The duke was sent
for.
The message found him at his Chateau of Joinville. He lost no time
in obeying the summons. He set out on Saturday, the 28th of February, 1562,
accompanied by his brother the cardinal, 200 gentlemen, and a body of horse.
Three leagues on the road to Paris is the town of Vassy. It contained in those
days 3,000 inhabitants, about a third of whom had embraced the Reformed faith.
It stood on lands which belonged to the duke's niece, Mary Stuart of Scotland,
and its Protestant congregation gave special umbrage to the Dowager-Duchess of
Guise, who could not brook the idea that the vassals of her granddaughter should
profess a different faith from that of their feudal superior. The duke, on his
way to this little town, recruited his troop at one of the villages through
which he passed, with a muster of foot-soldiers and archers. "The Saturday
before the slaughter," says Crespin, "they were seen to make ready their
weapons—arquebuses and pistols."[8]
On Sunday morning,
the 1st of March, the duke, after an early mass, resumed his march. "Urged by
the importunities of his mother," says Thaunus, "he came with intention to
dissolve these conventicles by his presence."[9] He was yet a little way
from Vassy when a bell began to ring. On inquiring what it meant, seeing the
hour was early, he was told that it was the Huguenot bell ringing for sermon.
Plucking at his beard, as his wont was when he was choleric, he swore that he
would Huguenot them after another fashion,[10] Entering the town, he met
the provost, the prior, and the curate in the market-place, who entreated him to
go to the spot where the Protestants were assembled.[11] The Huguenot meeting-house
was a barn, about 100 yards distant, on the city wall. A portion of the duke's
troop marched on before, and arrived at the building. The Protestants were
assembled to the number of 1,200; the psalm and the prayer were ended, and the
sermon had begun. The congregation were suddenly startled by persons outside
throwing stones at the windows, and shouting out, "Heretics! rebels! dogs!"
Presently the discharge of fire-arms told them that they were surrounded by
armed men. The Protestants endeavored to close the door, but were unable from
the crowd of soldiers pressing in, with oaths and shouts of "Kill, kill!" "Those
within," says Crespin, "were so astonied that they knew not which way to turn
them, but running hither and thither fell one upon another, flying as poor sheep
before a company of ravening wolves. Some of the murderers shot of their pieces
at those that were in the galleries; others cut in pieces such as they lighted
upon; others had their heads cleft in twain, their arms and hands cut off, and
thus did they what they could to hew them all in pieces, so as many of them gave
up the ghost even in the place. The walls and galleries of the said barn were
dyed with the blood of those who were everywhere murdered."
Hearing the
tumult, the duke hastened to the spot. On coming up he was hit with a stone in
the face. On seeing him bleeding, the rage of his soldiers was redoubled, and
the butchery became more horrible. Seeing escape impossible by the door or
window, many of the congregation attempted to break through the roof, but they
were shot down as they climbed up on the rafters. One soldier savagely boasted
that he had brought down a dozen of these pigeons. Some who escaped in this way
leaped down from the city walls, and escaped into the woods and vineyards. The
pastor, M. Morel, on his knees in the pulpit invoking God, was fired at.
Throwing off his gown, he attempted to escape, but stumbling over a dead body,
he received two sabre-cuts, one on the shoulder, another on the head. A soldier
raised his weapon to hough him, but his sword broke at the hilt. Supported by
two men the pastor was led before the duke. "Who made you so bold as to seduce
this people?" demanded the duke. "Sir," replied M. Morel, "I am no seducer, for
I have preached to them the Gospel of Jesus Christ." "Go," said the duke to the
provost, "and get ready a gibbet, and hang this rogue." These orders were not
executed. The duke's soldiers were too busy sabreing the unarmed multitude, and
collecting the booty, to hang the pastor, and none of the town's-people had the
heart to do so cruel a deed.[12]
When the dreadful
work was over, it was found that from sixty to eighty persons had been killed,
and 250 wounded, many of them mortally. The streets were filled with the most
piteous spectacles. Women were seen with dishevelled hair, and faces besmeared
with blood from their streaming wounds, dragging themselves along, and filling
the air with their cries and lamentations. The soldiers signalized their triumph
by pulling down the pulpit, burning the Bibles and Psalters, plundering the
poor's-box, spoiling the killed of their raiment; and wrecking the place. The
large pulpit Bible was taken to the duke. He examined the title-page, and his
learning enabled him to make out that it had been printed the year before. He
carried it to his brother the cardinal, who all the time of the massacre had
been loitering by the wall of the churchyard, and presented the Bible to him as
a sample of the pestiferous tenets of the Huguenots. "Why, brother," said the
cardinal, after scanning its title-page a moment, "there is no harm in this
book, for it is the Bible—the Holy Scripture." "The duke being offended at that
answer," says Crespin, "grew into a greater rage than before, saying, 'Blood of
God! —what!—how now!—the Holy Scripture! It is a thousand and five hundred years
ago since Jesus Christ suffered his death and passion, and it is but a year ago
since these books were imprinted; how, then, say you that this is the
Gospel?'"[13]
The massacre at
Vassy was the first blow struck in the civil wars of France, and it is important
to note that it was the act of the Romanists. Being done in violation of the
Edict of January, which covered the Protestants of Vassy, and never disowned or
punished by any constituted authority of the nation, it proclaimed that the rule
of law had ceased, and that the reign of force had begun. A few days afterwards
the duke entered Paris, more like a conqueror who had routed the enemies of
France, than a man dripping with the blood of his fellow-subjects. Right and
left of him rode the Constable and the Marshal St. Andre, the other two members
of the Triumvirate, while the nobles, burgesses, and whole populace of the
capital turned out to grace his entry, and by their enthusiastic cheers proclaim
his welcome. As if he had been king, they shouted, "Long life to Guise!"[14] The blood of Vassy, said
the mob of Paris, be on us, and on our children.
The Protestants of
France had for some time past been revolving the question of taking up arms and
standing to their defense, and this deplorable massacre helped to clear their
minds. The reverence, approaching to a superstition, which in those days hedged
round the person of a king, made the Huguenots shrink with horror from what
looked like rebellion. But the question was no longer, Shall we oppose the king?
The Triumvirate had, in effect, set aside both king and regent, and the duke and
the mob were masters of the State. The question was, Shall we oppose the
Triumvirate which has made itself supreme over throne and Parliament? Long did
the Huguenots hesitate, most unwilling were they to draw the sword; especially
so was the greatest Huguenot that France then contained, Coligny. Ever as he put
his hand upon his sword's hilt, there would rise before him the long and dismal
vista of battle and siege and woe through which France must pass before that
sword, once unsheathed, could be returned into its scabbard. He, therefore, long
forbore to take the irrevocable step, when one less brave or less foreseeing
would have rushed to the battle-field. But even Coligny was at last convinced
that farther delay would be cowardice, and that the curse of liberty would rest
on every sword of Huguenot that remained longer in its scabbard.
Had the
Edict of January, which gave a qualified permission for the open celebration of
the Reformed worship, been maintained, the Protestants of France never would
have thought of carrying their appeal to the battle-field. Had argument been the
only weapon with which they were assailed, argument would have been the only
weapon with which they would have sought to defend themselves; but when a
lawless power stood up, which trampled on royal authority, annulled laws, tore
up treaties, and massacred Protestant congregations wholesale; when to them
there no longer existed a throne, or laws, or tribunals, or rights of
citizenship; when their estates were confiscated, their castles burned, the
blood of their wives and children spilt, their names branded with infamy, and a
price put upon their heads, why, surely, if ever resistance was lawful in the
case of any people, and if circumstances could be imagined in which it was
dutiful to repel force by force, they were those of the French Protestants at
that hour.
Even when it is the civil liberties only of a nation that are
menaced by the tyrant or the invader, it is held the first duty of the subject
to gird on his sword, and to maintain them with his blood; and we are altogether
unable to understand why it should be less his duty to do so when, in addition
to civil liberty, tke battle is for the sanctity of home, the freedom of
conscience, and the lives and religion of half a nation. So stood the case in
France at that hour. Every end for which government is ordained, and society
exists, was attacked and overthrown. If the Huguenots had not met their foes on
the battle-field, their name, their race, their faith would have been trodden
out in France.
Far and wide over the kingdom flew the news of the
Massacre of Vassy. One party whispered the dreadful tale in accents of horror;
another party proclaimed it in a tone of exultation and triumph. The impunity,
or rather applause, accorded to its author emboldened the Romanists to proceed
to even greater excesses. In a few weeks the terrible scenes of Vassy were
repeated in many of the towns of France. At Paris, at Senlis, at Meaux, at
Amiens, at Chalons, at Tours, at Toulouse, and many other towns, the fanatic mob
rose upon the Protestants and massacred them, pillaging and burning their
dwelllings. All the while the cathedral bells would be tolled, and the populace
would sing songs of triumph in the streets. At Tours 300 Protestants were shut
up in their church, where they were kept three days without food, and then
brought out, tied two and two, led to the river's brink, and butchered like
sheep. Children were sold for a crown a-piece. The President of Tours was tied
to two willow-trees, and disembowelled alive.[15] At Toulouse the same
horrible scenes were enacted on a larger scale. That city contained at this time
between 30,000 and 40,000 Protestants—magistrates, students, and men of letters
and refinement. The tocsin was rung in all the churches, the peasantry for miles
around the city was raised en masse; the Huguenots took refuge in the Capitol of
Toulouse, where they were besieged, and finally compelled to surrender. Then
followed a revolting massacre of from 3,000 to 4,000 Protestants.[16]
The Seine, the
Loire, and the Garonne were dyed with Protestant blood, and ghastly corpses,
borne on the bosom of the stream, startled the dwellers in distant cities and
castles, and seemed to cry for justice, as they floated away to find burial in
the ocean.
The Duke of Guise now repaired to Fontainebleau, whither the
King and the Queen-mother had fled, and compelled them to return to Paris.
Catherine de Medici and her son were now wholly in the hands of the duke, and
when they entered the Castle of Vincennes, about a mile from Paris, "the queen
bore a doleful countenance, not able to refrain from tears; and the young king
crying like a child, as ff they had been both led into captivity."[17] The Parliament was not
less obsequious. Its humble office was to register arrets at the duke's bidding.
These persecuting edicts followed each other with alarming rapidity during the
terrible summer of 1562, than which there is no more doleful year in the French
annals, not even excepting perhaps the outstanding horror of 1572—the Massacre
of St. Bartholomew. The Popish mob was supplied with arms and formed into
regiments. The churches served as club-houses. When the tocsin sounded, 50,000
men would turn out at the summons. All Huguenots were ordered to quit Paris
within twenty-four hours;[18] after this, any one seen
in the streets, and suspected of being a Huguenot, was mobbed and dispatched.
Advantage was in some cases taken of this to gratify private revenge. One had
only to raise the cry of Huguenot against those at whom one happened to have a
spite, or to whom one owed money, and the bystanders did the rest. On the 8th of
June the Parliament passed a law empowering any one who should meet a Huguenot
to kill him on the spot. The edict was to be read by the curets every Sunday
after the sermon that follows high mass.[19] The peasantry provided
themselves with scythes, pikes, cutlasses, knives, and other cruel weapons, and
scoured the country as if they had been ridding it of wild beasts. The priests
facetiously called this "letting slip the big hound."[20] They selected as captain,
sometimes a monk, sometimes a brigand; and on one occasion, at least, a bishop
was seen marching at their head.
Their progress over the country,
especially in the south, where the Protestants were numerous, could be traced in
the frightful memorials they left on their track—corpses strewed along the
roads, bodies dangling from the trees, mangled victims dyeing the verdure of the
fields with their blood, and spending their last breath in cries and
supplications to Heaven.
On the 18th of August, 1562, the Parliament
issued yet another decree, declaring all the gentlemen of "the religion"
traitors to God and the king. From this time the conflict became a war of
province against province, and city against city, for the frightful outrages to
which the Protestants were subjected provoked them into reprisals. Yet the
violence of the Huguenot greatly differed from the violence of the Romanist. The
former gutted Popish cathedrals and churches, broke down the images, and drove
away the priests. The latter burned houses, tore up vines and fruit-trees, and
slaughtered men and women, often with such diabolical and disgusting cruelty as
forbids us to describe their acts. In some places rivulets of Huguenot blood, a
foot in depth, were seen flowing. Those who wish to read the details of the
crimes and woes that then overwhelmed France will find the dreadful recital, if
they have courage to peruse it, in the pages of Agrippa d'Aubigne, De Thou,
Beza, Crespin, and other historians.[21]
But before these
latter edicts were issued the Huguenots had come to a decision. While Coligny,
shut up in his Castle of Chatilion, was revolving the question of civil war,
events were solving that question for him.
Wherever he looked he saw
cities sacked, castles in flames, and men and women slaughtered in thousands;
what was this but civil war? The tidings of to-day were ever sadder than those
of yesterday, and the tidings of to-morrow would, he but too surely guessed, be
sadder than those of to-day.
The heart of his wife, the magnanimous
Charlotte Laval, was torn with anguish at the thought of the sufferings her
brethren and sisters in the faith were enduring. One night she awoke her husband
from sleep by her tears and sobs. "We lie here softly," said she, "while our
brethren's bodies, who are flesh of our flesh and bone of our bone, are some of
them in dungeons, and others lying in the open fields, food for dogs and ravens.
This bed is a tomb for me, seeing they are not buried. Can we sleep in peace,
without hearing our brethren's last groanings?" "Are you prepared," asked the
admiral in reply, "to hear of my defeat, to see me dragged to a scaffold and put
to death by the common hangman? are you prepared to see our name branded, our
estates confiscated, and our children made beggars? I will give you," he
continued, "three weeks to think on these things, and when you have fortified
yourself against them, I will go forth to perish with my brethren." "The three
weeks are gone already," was the prompt and noble reply of Charlotte Laval. "Go
in God's name and he will not suffer you to be defeated."[22]
A few mornings only
had passed when Admiral Coliguy was seen on his way to open the first campaign
of the civil wars.
CHAPTER 8
Back to
Top
COMMENCEHENT OF THE HUGUENOT
WARS.
Conde Seizes Orleans–His Compatriot Chiefs – Prince of Porcian–
Rochefoucault–Rohan-Grammont–Montgomery–Soubise–St. Phale –La
Mothe–Genlis–Marvellous Spread of the Reformed Faith–The Popish Party–Strength
of Protestantism in France – Question of the Civil Wars – Justification of the
Huguenots–Finance–Foreign Allies.
The Protestant chiefs having resolved to take up the
gage which the Triumvirate had thrown down, the Prince of Conde struck the first
blow by dispatching Coligny's brother D'Andelot, with 5,000 men, to make himself
master of Orleans. In a few days thereafter (April 2nd, 1562), the prince
himself entered that city, amid the acclamations of the inhabitants, who
accompanied him through the streets chanting grandly the 124th Psalm, in Marot's
meter,[1] Admiral Coligny, on
arriving at headquarters, found a brilliant assemblage gathered round Conde.
Among those already arrived or daily expected was Anthony of Croy, Prince of
Perclan. Though related to the House of Lorraine, the Prince of Perclan was a
firm opponent of the policy of the Guises, and one of the best captains of his
time. He was married to Catherine of Cleves, Countess of Eu, niece to the Prince
of Conde, by whom he was greatly beloved for his amiable qualities as well as
for his soldierly accomplishments. And there was also Francis, Count of La
Rochefoucault, Prince of Marcillac. He was by birth and dignity the first noble
of Guienne, and the richest and most potent man in all Poitou. He could have
raised an army among his relations, friends, and vassals alone. He was an
experienced soldier: valiant, courageous, generous, and much beloved by Henry
II, in whose wars he had greatly distinguished himself. It was his fate to be
inhumanly slaughtered, as we shall see, in the St. Bartholomew Massacre. There
was Rene, Viscount of Rohan. He was by the mother's side related to the family
of Navarre, being cousin-german to Jeanne d'Albret. Being by her means
instructed in the Reformed faith, that queen made him her lieutenant-general
during the minority of her son Henry, afterwards King of France, whom he served
with inviolable fidelity. There was Anthony, Count of Grammont, who was in great
esteem among the Reformed on account of his valor and his high character. Having
embraced the Protestant faith, he opposed uncompromisingly the Guises, and bore
himself with great distinction and gallantry among the Huguenot chiefs in the
civil wars. No less considerable was Gabriel, Count of Montgomery, also one of
the group around the prince. His valor, prudence, and sagacity enabled him, in
the absence of large estates or family connections, to uphold the credit of the
Protestant party and the luster of the Protestant arms after the fall of Conde,
of Coligny, and of other leaders. It was from his hand that Henry II had
received his death-blow in the fatal tournament–as fatal in the end to
Montgomery as to Henry, for Catherine de Medici never forgave him the unhappy
accident of slaying her husband; and when at last Montgomery fell into her
hands, she had him executed on the scaffold. And there was John, Lord of
Soubise, of the illustrious House of Partenay of Poitou, and the last who bore
the name and title. Soubise had borne arms under Henry II, being
commander-in-chief in the army of Tuscany. This gave him an opportunity of
visiting the court of Rene at Ferrara, where he was instructed in the Reformed
doctrine. On his return to France he displayed great zeal in propagating the
Protestant faith, and when the civil wars broke out the Prince de Conde sent him
to command at Lyons, where, acquitting himself with equal activity and prudence,
he fully answered the expectations of his chief. Louis of Vadray, known in
history by the name of Lord of Mouy St. Phale, was one of the more considerable
of the patriot-heroes that followed the banners of Conde. Of great intrepidity
and daring, his achievements are amongst the most brilliant feats of the civil
wars. He was assassinated in 1569 by the same person – Manrevel of Brie – who
wounded the Admiral Coligny in Paris in 1572. Nor must we omit to mention
Anthony Raguier, Lord of Esternay and of La Mothe de Tilly. Not only did he
place his own sword at the service of Conde, he brought over to the standard of
the prince and the profession of the Protestant faith, his brother-in-law
Francis of Bethune, Baron of Rosny, father of the Duke of Sully. And there was
the head of the ancient and illustrious House of Picardy, Adrian de Hangest,
Lord of Genlis, who was the father of thirty-two children by his wife Frances du
Maz. Like another Hamilcar leading his numerous sons to the altar, he devoted
them to the defense of their country's laws, and the maintenance of its
Protestant faith. The enthusiasm and bravery of the sons, as displayed under the
banners of Conde, amply rewarded the devotion and patriotism of the father. All
of them became distinguished in the campaigns that followed.[2]
Nothing could more
conclusively attest the strength of the position which Protestantism had
conquered for itself in France than this brilliant list. The men whom we see
round the Huguenot chief are the flower of a glorious land. They are no needy
adventurers, whom the love of excitement, or the hope of spoil, or the thirst
for distinction has driven to the battle-field. Their castles adorn the soil,
and their names illustrate the annals of their country; yet here we see them
coming forward, at this supreme hour, and deliberately staking the honor of
their houses, the revenues of their estates, the glory of their names, and even
life itself! What could have moved them to this but their loyalty to the
Gospel–their deep, thorough, and most intelligent conviction that the Reformed
doctrine was based on Scripture, and that it had bound up with it not more their
own personal salvation than the order, the prosperity, and the glory of their
country?
The Protestant cause had attractions not alone for the
patricians of France; it was embraced by the intelligence and furthered by the
energy of the middle classes. It is well to remember this. Bankers and men of
commerce; lawyers and men of letters; magistrates and artists; in short, the
staple of the nation, the guides of its opinion, the creators of its wealth, and
the pillars of its order, rallied to the Protestant standard. In every part of
France the Reformed faith spread with astonishing rapidity during the reigns of
Francis II and Charles IX. It was embraced by the villages scattered along at
the foot of the Alps and the base of the Pyrenees. It established itself in the
powerful city of Grenoble. The Parliament and magistracy of that prosperous
community took special interest in the preaching of the Protestant doctrine in
their town; and the example of Grenoble had a great influence on the whole of
that rich region of which it was the capital. The city of Marseilles on the
Mediterranean shore; the flourishing seaports on the western coast; the fertile
and lovely valleys of central France; the vine-clad plains on the east; the rich
and populous Picardy and Normandy on the north–all were covered with the
churches and congregations of the Reformed faith. "Climate, custom, prejudice,
superstition," says Gaberel, "seemed to have no power to resist or modify the
spread of the Protestant doctrines. No sooner was a church provided with a
pastor, than the inhabitants of the villages and towns in the neighborhood
demolished their Popish altars, and flocked to hear the preaching of the
Protestant doctrine. The occupants of the castles and rich houses followed the
example of their tenantry, and opened their mansions for worship when the church
stood at too great a distance."[3] Many of the prelates,
even, had perused the writings of Calvin, and were favorable to the Reformed
doctrine, although, for obvious reasons, they had to be careful in avowing their
convictions and preferences.
When we turn from the grand phalanx of
nobles, warrior's, jurists, literary men, merchants, and cities around the
Protestant standard, to contemplate the opposing ranks which still remained
loyal to Rome, and were now challenging the Reformed to do battle for their
faith, we are forcibly struck with the vast inferiority, in all the elements of
real power, on the Popish side. First on that side came the crown. We say the
crown, for apart from it Charles IX had no power. Next to the crown came the
Queen-mother, who, despite certain caprices which at times excited the hopes of
the Protestants and awakened the fears of the Pope, remained staunchly loyal at
heart to the cause of Rome–for what else could be expected of the niece of
Clement VII? After the Queen-mother came the Triumvirate. It embraced one grand
figure, the bluff, honest, awful Constable, so proud of his ancient blood and
his ancient Christianity! Over against him we may set the weak and wicked St.
Andre, who was continully enriching himself with plunder, and continually
sinking deeper in debt. Then came the Guises –truculent, thoroughly able, and as
athirst for blood as the Marshal St. Andre for money. These strangers in France
seem to have taken kindly to the soil, if one may judge from the amazing
rapidity with which their power and their honors had flourished since their
arrival in it. We assign the last place here to the King of Navarre, though as a
prince of the blood he ought to have had the first place after the crown, but
for his utter insignificance, which made him be fully more contemned even by the
Papists than by the Protestants.
The Popish party were numerically the
majority of the nation, but in respect of intelligence and virtue they were by
much the smaller portion of it. There was, of course, a moiety of the nobility,
of professional men, and of the middle orders still attached to the Roman
worship, and more or less zealous in its behalf; but the great strength of the
Triumvirate lay in another quarter. The Sorbonne, the secular priests, and the
cloistered orders continued unwavering in their attachment to the Pope. And
behind was a yet greater force–without which, the zeal of Triumvirate, of cure,
and of friar would have effected but little–the rabble, namely, of Paris and
many of the great cities. This was a very multifarious host, more formidable in
numbers than in power, if names are to be weighed and not counted. Protestantism
in France was not merely on the road to victory, morally it had already achieved
it.
And further, to form a true estimate of the strength of the position
which Protestantism had now won, we must take account of the situation of the
country, and the endowments of the people in which it had so deeply rooted
itself. Placed in the center of Christendom, France acted powerfully on all the
nations around it. It was, or till a few years ago had been, the first of the
European kingdoms in letters, in arts, in arms. Its people possessed a beautiful
genius. Since the intellect of classic days there had appeared, perhaps, no
finer mental development than the French mind; none that came so near the old
Roman type. Without apparent labor the French genius could lay open with a touch
the depths of an abstruse question, or soar to the heights of a sublime one.
Protestantism had begun to quicken the French intellect into a marvellous
development of strength and beauty, and but for the sudden and unexpected blight
that overtook it, its efflorescence would have rivaled, it may be eclipsed, in
power and splendor that extraordinary outburst of intellect that followed the
Reformation in England, and which has made the era of Elizabeth forever
famous.
Nor was it the least of the advantages of French Protestantism
that its headquarters were not within, but outside the kingdom. By a marvellous
Providence a little territory, invisibly yet inviolably guarded, had been called
into existence as an asylum where, with the thunders of the mighty tempests
resounding on every side of it, the great chief of the movement might watch the
execution of his plans in every part of the field, but especially in France.
Calvin was sufficiently distant from his native land to be undisturbed by its
convulsions, and yet sufficiently near to send daily assistance and succor to
it, to commission evangelists, to advise, to encourage – in short, to do
whatever could tend to maintain and advance the work. The Reformer was now
giving the last touches to his mighty task before retiring from the view of men,
but Geneva, through her Church, through her schools, and through her
printing-presses, would, it was thought, continue to flood France with those
instrumentalities for the regeneration of Christendom, which the prodigious
industry and mighty genius of Calvin had prepared.
But the very strength
of Protestantism in France at this era awakens doubts touching the step which
the Protestants of that country were now about to take, and compels us to pause
and review a decision at which we have already arrived. How had Protestantism
come to occupy this position, and what were the weapons which had conquered for
it so large a place in the national mind? This question admits of but one
answer: it was the teachings of evangelists, the blood of martyrs, and the holy
lives of confessors. Then why not permit the same weapons to consummate the
victory? Does it not argue a criminal impatience to exchange evangelists for
soldiers? Does it not manifest a sinful mistrust of those holy instrumentalities
which have already proved their omnipotency by all but converting France, to
supersede them by the rude appliances of armies and battle-fields? In truth, so
long as the Protestants had it in their power to avoid the dire necessity of
taking up arms, so long, in short, as the certain ruin of the cause did not
stare them in the face in the way of their sitting still, they were not
justified in making their appeal to arms. But they judged, and we think rightly,
that they had now no alternative; that the Triumvirate had decided this question
for them; and that nothing remained, if the last remnants of conscience and
liberty were not to be trodden out, but to take their place on the battle-field.
The legitimate rule of the king had been superseded by the usurpation of a
junto, the leading spirits of which were foreigners. The Protestants saw
treaties torn up, and soldiers enrolled for the work of murder. They saw their
brethren slaughtered like sheep, not in hundreds only, but literally in
thousands. They saw the smoke of burning cities and castles darkening the
firmament, unburied corpses tainting the air, and the blood of men and women
dyeing their rivers, and tinting the seas around their coasts. They saw groups
of orphans wandering about, crying for bread, or laying themselves down to die
of hunger. The touching words of Charlotte Laval addressed to her husband, which
we have already quoted, show us how the noblest minds in France felt and
reasoned in the presence of these awful tragedies. To remain in peace in their
houses, while these oppressions and crimes were being enacted around them–were
being done, so to speak, in their very sight–was not only to act a cowardly
part, it was to act an inhuman part. It was to abnegate the right, not of
citizens only, but of men. If they should longer refuse to stand to their
defense, posterity, they felt, would hold them guilty of their brethren's blood,
and their names would be coupled with those of the persecutors in the cry of
that blood for vengeance.
The pre-eminence of France completes the
justification of the Huguenots, by completing the necessity for the step to
which they now had recourse. Rome could not possibly permit Protestantism to
triumph in a country so central, and whose influence was so powerfully felt all
over Europe. The Pope must needs suppress the Reformation in France at all
costs. The Popish Powers, and especially Spain, felt equally with the Pope the
greatness of the crisis, and willingly contributed the aid of their arms to
extinguish Huguenotism. Its triumph in France would have revolutionized their
kingdoms, and shaken their thrones. It was a life-and-death struggle; and but
for the stand which the Protestant chiefs made, the soldiers of the Triumvirate,
and the armies of Spain, would have marched from the Seine to the Mediterranean,
from the frontier of Lorraine to the western seaboard, slaughtering the
Huguenots like sheep, and Protestantism would have been as completely trampled
out in France as it was in Spain.
Both sides now began to prepare with
rigor for the inevitable conflict. On the Huguenot banner was inscribed "Liberty
of Worship," and the special grievance which compelled the unfurling of that
banner was the flagrant violation of the Edict of January–which guarantee them
that liberty–in the dreadful massacre of the Protestants as they were
worshipping at Vassy under the supposed protection of that edict. This was
specially mentioned in the manifesto which the Huguenots now put forth, but
neither was regret expressed by the Triumvirate for the violation of the edict,
nor promise given that it would be observed in time to come, which made the
Protestant princes conclude that the Massacre of Vassy would be repeated again
and again, till not a Huguenot was left to charge the Government with its
shameful breach of faith. "To arms!" must therefore be their
watchword.
Wars, although styled religious, must be gone about in the
ordinary way; soldiers must be enrolled, and money collected, without which it
is impossible to fight battles. The Prince of Conde wrote circular letters to
the Reformed Churches in France, craving their aid in men and money to carry on
the war about to be commenced.[4] Several of the Churches,
before voting the desired assistance, sent deputies to Paris to ascertain the
real state of matters, and whether any alternative was left them save the grave
one of taking up arms. As a consequence, funds and fighting men came in slowly.
From La Rochelle came neither men nor money, till after the campaign had been
commenced; but that Church, and others, finding on careful inquiry that the
state of matters was such as the Huguenot manifesto had set forth, threw
themselves afterwards with zeal into the conflict, and liberally supported
it.
The Huguenot chiefs, before unsheathing the sword, sat down together
and partook of the Lord's Supper. After communion they subscribed a bond, or
"Act of Association," in which they pledged themselves to fidelity to God and to
one another, and obedience to Conde as head of the Protestant League, and
promised to assist him with "money, arms, horses, and all other warlike
equipages." They declared themselves in arms for "the defense of the king's
honor and liberty, the maintenance of the pure worship of God, and the due
observance of the edicts."[5] They swore also to promote
reformation of manners and true piety among themselves and followers, to punish
blasphemy, profanation, and vice, and to maintain the preaching of the Gospel in
their camp.[6] This deed, by which the
Huguenot wars were inaugurated, tended to promote confidence among the
confederates, and to keep them united in the presence of a crafty enemy, who
continually labored to sow jealousies and disdains among them; and further, it
sanctified and sublinmd the war by keeping its sacred and holy object in the eye
of those who were in arms.
Another matter which the Calvinist lords
deemed it prudent to arrange before coming to blows, was the important one of
succors from abroad. On this point their opponents enjoyed great advantages. Not
only could they draw upon the national treasury for the support of the war,
having the use of the king's name, but they had powerful and zealous friends
abroad who, they knew, would hasten to their aid. The Triumvirate had promises
of large succors from the then wealthy governments of Spain, Italy, and Savoy;
and they had perfect confidence in these promises being kept, for the cause for
which the Triumvirate was in arms was the cause of the Pope and Philip of Spain
quite as much as it was that of the Guises.
The Huguenots, in like
manner, cast their eyes abroad, if haply they might find allies and succorers in
those countries where the Protestant faith was professed. The war now commencing
was not one of race or nationality; it was no war of creed in a narrow sense; it
was a war for the great principle of Protestantism in both its Lutheran and
Reformed aspects, and which was creating a new commonwealth, which the Rhine
could not divide, nor the Alps bound. That was not a Gallic commonwealth, nor a
Teutonic commonwealth, but a great spiritual empire, which was blending in
sympathy and in interest every kindred and tribe that entered its holy
brotherhood. Therefore, in the war now beginning neither Germany nor England
could, with due regard to themselves, be neutral, for every victory of the Roman
Catholic Powers, now confederate for the suppression of the Reformation, not in
France only, but in all countries, was a step in the triumphant march of these
powers towards the frontiers of the other Reformed countries. The true Policy of
England and Germany was clearly to fight the battle at as great a distance as
Possible from their own doors.
To Coliguy the project of bringing foreign
soldiers into France was one the wisdom of which he extremely doubted. He feared
the effect which such a step might have on a people naturally jealous and proud,
and to whom he knew it would be distasteful. For every foreign auxiliary he
should obtain he might lose a home soldier. But again events decided the matter
for him. He saw the Savoyards, the Swiss, and the Spaniards daily arriving to
swell the royalist ranks, and slaughter the children of France, and if he would
meet the enemy, not in equal numbers for he saw no likelihood of being able to
bring man for man into the field but if he would meet him at the head of such a
force as should enable him to fight with some chance of success, he must do as
his opponents were doing, and accept help from those who were willing to give
it. Accordingly two ambassadors were dispatched on the errand of foreign aid,
the one to Germany and the other to England, and both found a favorable
reception for their overtures. The one succeeded in negotiating a treaty for
some thousands of German Reiter, or heavy cavalry–so well known in those days
for the execution they did on the field, where often they trampled down whole
ranks of the lighter troops of France; and the other ambassador was able to
persuade Queen Elizabeth so careful both of her money and her subjects, for
England was not then so rich in either as she long years afterwards became into
aid the Huguenots with 140,000 crowns and 6,000 soldiers, in return for which
the town of Havre was put in her keeping.
CHAPTER 9
Back to
Top
THE FIRST HUGUENOT WAR, AND DEATH OF
THE DUKE OF GUISE.
Final Overtures–Rejection–The Two
Standards–Division of France– Orleans the Huguenot Headquarters–Conde the
Leader–Coligny– The Two Armies Meet–Catherine's Policy–No Battle–Rouen
Besieged–Picture of the Two Camps–Fall of Rouen– Miseries – Death of the King of
Navarre–Battle of Dreux – Duke of Guise sole Dictator–Conde a Prisoner–Orleans
Besieged–The Inhabitants to be put to the Sword–The Duke of Guise Assassinated–
Catherine de Medici Supreme–Pacification of Amboise.
Unwilling to commit himself irrevocably to war, the
Prince of Conde made yet another overture to the court, before unsheathing the
sword and joining battle. He was willing to furl his banner and dismiss his
soldiers, provided a guarantee were given him that the Edict of January would be
observed till the king attained his majority, and if then his majesty should be
pleased no longer to grant liberty of conscience to his subjects, the prince and
his confederates were to have liberty to retire into some other country, without
prejudice to their estates and goods. And further, he demanded that the
Triumvirs meanwhile should withdraw from court, adding that if the Government
did not accept these reasonable terms, it would be answerable for all the
calamities that might befall the kingdom.[1] These terms were not
accepted; and all efforts in the interest of peace having now been exhausted,
the several provinces and cities of the kingdom made haste to rally, each under
its respective standard. Once again France pronounces upon the question of its
future; and unhappily it repeats the old answer: it confirms the choice it had
made under Francis I. A second time it takes the downward road – that leading to
revolution and the abyss. France is not unanimous, however; it is nearly equally
divided. Speaking generally, all France south of the Loire declared for the
Protestant cause. All the great cities of the Orleanois–Tours, Poictiers,
Bourges, Nismes, Montauban, Valence, Lyons, Toulouse, Bordeaux– opened their
gates to the soldiers of Conde, and cordially joined his standard: as did also
the fortified castles of Languedoc and Dauphine. In the north, Normandy, with
its towns and castles, declared for the same side.[2] The cities and provinces
just enumerated were the most populous and flourishing in France. It was in
these parts that the Reformation had struck its roots the most deeply, and hence
the unanimity and alacrity with which their inhabitants enrolled themselves on
the Protestant side.
Coliguy, though serving as Conde's lieutenant, was
the master-genius and director of the campaign. His strength of character, his
long training in military affairs, his resource, his prudence, his indomitable
resolution, all marked him out as the man pre-eminently qualified to lead,
although the notions of the age required that such an enterprise should be
graced by having as its ostensible head a prince of the blood. Coligny, towering
above the other princes and nobles around Conde, inspired the soldiers with
confidence, for they knew that he would lead them to victory, or if that were
denied, that he could do what may seem more difficult, turn defeat into triumph.
His sagacious eye it was that indicated Orleans as the true center of the
Huguenot strategy. Here, with the broad stream of the Loire rolling in front of
their position, and the friendly provinces of the south lying behind it, they
would lack neither provisions nor soldiers. Supplies to any amount would be
poured into their eamp by the great highway of the river, and they could recruit
their army from the enthusiastic populations in their rear. But further, the
Huguenots made themselves masters of Rouen in Normandy, which commands the
Seine; this enabled them to isolate Paris, the camp of the enemy; they could
close the gates of the two main arteries through which the capital procured its
supplies, and afflict it with famine: by shutting the Loire they could cut off
from it the wine and fruits of the fertile south; and their command of the Seine
enabled them to stop at their pleasure the transportation of the corn and cattle
of the north.
With these two strong positions, the one in the south and
the other in the north of the capital, it seemed as if it needed only that the
Huguenots should make themselves masters of Paris in order to end the campaign.
"Paris," says Devils, "alone gave more credit to its party than half the kingdom
would have done." It was a stronghold of Romanism, and its fanatical population
furnished an unrivaled recruiting-field for the Triumvirate. The advantage which
the possession of Paris would give the Huguenots, did not escape the sagacious
glance of Coligny, and he counselled Conde to march upon it at once, and strike
before the Guises had had time to complete their preparations for its defense.
The Prince unhappily delayed till the golden opportunity had passed.[3]
In the end of June,
Conde and Coligny set out from Orleans to attack Paris, and almost at the same
moment the Triumvirs began their march from Paris to besiege the Huguenots in
Orleans. The two armies, which consisted of about 10,000 each, met half-way
between the two cities. A battle was imminent, and if fought at that moment
would probably have been advantageous to the Huguenot arms. But the
Queen-mother, feigning a horror of bloodshed, came forward with a proposal for a
conference between the leaders on both sides. Catherine de Medici vaunted that
she could do more with her pen than twenty generals with their swords, and her
success on this occasion went far to justify her boast. Her proposal entangled
the Protestants in the meshes of diplomacy. The expedient which Catherine's
genius had hit upon for securing peace was that the leaders of the two parties
should go into exile till the king had attained his majority, and the troubles
of the nation had subsided. But the proposed exile was not equal. Coligny and
his confederates were to quit France, the Guises. and their friends were only to
retire from court.[4] One obvious consequence of
this arrangement was that Catherine would remain in sole possession of the
field, and would rule without a compeer. The Triumvirs were to remain within
call, should the Queen-mother desire their presence; Conde and Coligny, on the
other hand, were to remove beyond the frontier; and once gone, a long time would
elapse before they should be told that their services were needed, or that the
soil of France was able to bear their steps. The trap was too obvious for the
Hugmenot chiefs to fall into it. The Queen had gained her end, however; her
adroitness had shielded Paris, and it had wasted time in favor of the
Government, for the weeks as they sped past increased the forces of the
royalists, and diminished those of the Huguenots.
It was the Triumvirs
that made the next move in the campaign, by resolving to attack Rouen. Masters
of this town, the Huguenots, as we have said, held the keys of the Seine, and
having cut off the supplies from Paris, the Triumvirs were greatly alarmed, for
it was hard to say how long the fanaticism and loyaltry of the Parisians would
withstand the sobering influences of starvation. The Seine must be kept open at
all costs; the Government, moreover, was not free from fear that the Queen of
England would send troops into Normandy, and occupy that province, with the help
of the Huguenots. Should this happen, Paris itself would be in danger.
Accordingly the Duke of Guise was dispatched with his army to besiege Rouen.
While he is digging his trenches, posting his forces, and preparing the assault,
let us observe the state of discipline and sobriety in the the camps.
We
are all familiar with the pictures of Cromwell's army. We have read how his camp
resounded with the unwonted sounds of psalms and prayers, and how his soldiers
were animated by a devotion that made them respond as alertly to a summons to
sermon, which they knew would be of two hours' length, as to a summons to scale
the breach, or join battle. A century before the great English Puritan, similar
pictures might be witnessed in the camp of the French Huguenots. The morale of
their armies was high, and the discipline of their camp strict, especially in
their early campaigns. The soldier carried the Bible a-field, and this did more
than the strictest code or severest penalty to check disorder and
excess.
The Huguenots had written up on their banners, "For God and the
Prince," and they felt bound to live the Gospel as well as fight for it. Their
troops were guilty of no acts of pillage, the barn of the farmer and the store
of the merchant were perfectly safe in their neighborhood, and everything which
they obtained from the inhabitants they paid for. Cards and dice were banished
their camp; oaths and blasphemies were never heard; acts of immorality and
lewdness were prohibited under very severe penalties, and were of rare
occurrence. One officer of high rank, who brought disgrace upon the Huguenot
army by an act of libertinism, was hanged.[5]
Inside the town of
Rouen, round which there now rose a bristling wall of hostile standards and
redoubts, the same beautiful order prevailed. Besides the inhabitants, there
were 12,000 choice foot-soldiers from Conde's army, four squadrons of horse, and
2,000 English in the place, with 100 gentlemen who had volunteered to perish in
the defense of the town.[6] The theatres were closed.
There needed no imaginary drama, when one so real was passing before the
inhabitants. The churches were opened, and every day there was sermon in them.
In their houses the citizens chanted their daily psalm, just as if battle had
been far distant from their gates. On the ramparts, the inspired odes of Hebrew
times were thundered forth with a chorus of voices that rose loud above the
shouting of the captains, and the booming of the cannon.
The enthusiasm
for the defense pervaded all ranks, and both sexes. The daughters and wives of
the citizen-soldiers hastened to the walls, and regardless of the deadly shot
falling thick around them, they kept their fathers and husbands supplied with
ammunition and weapons.[7] They would maintain their
liberties or die. The town was under the command of the Count Montgomery.[8] Pursued by the implacable
resentment of Catherine de Medici, he had fled to England, where he embraced the
Reformed religion, and whence he returned to France to aid the Huguenots in
their great struggle. He was a skillful and courageous general, and knowing that
he would receive no quarter, he was resolved rather than surrender to make Rouen
his grave.
Let us turn to the royalist camp. The picture presented to us
there is the reverse of that which we have been contemplating. "There," says
Felice, "the grossest licentiousness prevailed." Catherine de Medici was present
with her maids of honor, who did not feel themselves under any necessity to
practice severer virtues in the trenches than they usually observed in the
Louvre. Games and carousals filled up the leisure hours of the common soldiers,
while tournaments and intrigues occupied the captains and knights. These two
widely different pictures are parted not by an age, but simply by the city walls
of Rouen.
The King of Navarre commanded in the royalist camp. The
besiegers assaulted the town not less than six times, and each time were
repulsed. At the end of the fifth week a mine was sprung, great part of the wall
was laid in ruins, and the soldiers scaling the breach, Rouen was taken. It was
the first to drink that bitter cup which so many of the cities of France were
afterwards called to drain. For a whole week it was given up to the soldiers.
They did their pleasure in it, and what that pleasure was can be conceived
without our describing it. Permitting the veil to rest on the other horrors, we
shall select for description two deaths of very different character. The first
is that of Pastor Augustin Marlorat. Of deep piety and great erudition, he had
figured conspicuously in the Colloquy of Poissy, where the Reformation had
vindicated itself before the civil and ecclesiastical grandees of France.
Present in the city during the five memorable weeks of the siege, his heroic
words, daily addressed to the citizens from the pulpit, had been translated by
the combatants into heroic deeds on the wall. "You have seduced the people,"
said Constable de Montmorency to him, when he was brought before him after the
capture of the town. "If so," calmly replied Marlorat, "God first seduced me,
for I have preached nothing to them but the Gospel of his Son." Placed on a
hurdle, he was straightway dragged to the gallows and hanged, sustaining with
meekness and Christian courage the indignities and cruelties inflicted on him at
the place of execution.[9]
The other
death-scene is that of Antoine de Bourbon, King of Navarre. Ensnared, as we have
already said, by the brilliant but altogether delusive promises of the King of
Spain, he had deserted the Protestants, and consented to be the ornamental head
of the Romanist party. He was mortally wounded in the siege, and seeing death
approaching, he was visited with a bitter but a late repentance. He implored his
physician, who strove in vain to cure his wound, to read to him out of the
Scriptures; and he protested, the tears streaming clown his face, that if his
life were spared he would cause the Gospel to be preached all throughout his
dominions.[10] He died at the age ot
forty-four, regretted by neither party.
After the fall and sack of Rouen,
seven weeks passed away, and then the two armies met (19th December) near the
town of Dreux. This was the first pitched battle of the civil wars, and the only
regular engagement in the first campaign. The disparity of force was
considerable, the Huguenots having only 10,000 of all arms, while the royalists
had 20,000, horse and foot, on the field. Battle being joined, the Huguenots had
won the day when a stratagem of the Duke of Guise snatched victory from their
grasp. All the time that the battle was raging–that is, from noon till five in
the afternoon –Guise sat in the rear, surrounded by a chosen body of
men-at-arms, intently watching the progress of the action, and at times sending
forward the other Triumvirs with succors. At last the moment he had waited for
came. The duke rode out to the front, rose in his stirrups, cast a glance over
the field, and bidding his reserves follow, for the day was theirs, dashed
forward. The Huguenots had broken their ranks and were pursuing the routed
royalists all over the field. The duke was upon them before they had time to
reform, and wearied with fighting, and unable, to sustain this onset of fresh
troops, they went down before the cavalry of the duke.[11] Guise's stratagem had
succeeded. Victory passed over from the Huguenot to the royalist
side.
The carnage was great. Eight thousand dead covered the field, among
whom was La Brosse, who had begun the massacre at Vassy. The rank not less than
the numbers of the slain gave great political consequence to the battle. The
Marshal St. Andre was killed; Montmorency, severely wounded, had surrendered
himself prisoner; and thus, of the three Triumvirs, Guise alone remained. The
battle of Dreux had crowned him with a double victory, for his immediate
appointment as lieutenant-general of the kingdom, and commander-in-chief of the
army, placed France in his hands.
This battle left its mark on the
Huguenot side also. The Prince of Conde was taken prisoner at the very close of
the action. Being led to the head-quarters of Guise, the duke and the prince
passed the night in the same bed;[12] the duke, it is said,
sleeping soundly, and Conde lying awake, ruminating on the strange fortune of
war which had so suddenly changed him from a conqueror into a captive. The
prince being now a prisoner, Coligny was appointed generalissimo of the
Huguenots. The two Bourbons were removed, and Guise and Coligny stood face to
face. It chanced that a messenger who had left the field at the moment that the
battle was going against the Government, brought to the Louvre the news that the
Huguenots had won the day. The remark of Catherine de Medici, who foresaw that
the triumph of Coligny would diminish the power of Guise–whose authority had
begun to over-shadow her own–was imperturbably cool, and shows how little effort
it cost her to be on either side, if only she could retain power. "Well, then,"
she said, on hearing the messenger's report, "Well, then, we shall have to say
our prayers in French."[13]
The war went on,
although it had to be waged on a frozen earth, and beneath skies often dark with
tempest; for it was winter. All France was at this hour a battle-field. Not a
province was there, scarce even a city, in which the Roman Catholics and
Huguenots were not arrayed in arms against each other. We nmst follow the march
of the main army, however, without turning aside to chronicle provincial
conflicts. After the defeat at Dreux, Coligny–now commander-in-chief – formed
the Huguenot forces into two armies, and with the one he marched into Normandy,
and sent his brother D'Andelot at the head of the other to occupy Orleans– that
great center and stronghold of the Huguenot cause. The Duke of Guise followed
close on the steps of the latter, in order to besiege Orleans. Having sat down
before the town on the 5th of February, 1563, the siege was prosecuted with
great rigor. The bridge of the Loire was taken. Next two important suburbs fell
into the hands of the duke. On the 18th all was ready for the capture of Orleans
on the morrow, he wrote to the Queen-mother, telling her that his purpose was to
put every man and woman in Orleans to the sword, and sow its foundations with
salt.[14]This good beginning he would follow up by summoning
all the nobles of France, with their retainers, to his standard, and with this
mighty host he would pursue the admiral into Normandy, and drive him and all his
followers into the sea, and so stamp out the Huguenot insurrection. "Once
unearth the foxes," said he, "and we will hunt them all over France."[15]
Such was the brief
and terrible program of the duke for purging France of the Huguenot heresy.
Where today stood the fair city of Orleans, tomorrow would be seen only a
blackened heap; and wherever this leprosy had spread, thither, all over France,
would the duke pursue it with fire and sword, and never rest till it was burned
out. A whole hecatomb of cities, provinces, and men would grace the obsequies of
Huguenotism. The duke had gone to the trenches to see that all was ready for the
assault that was to give Orleans to him on the morrow. Of all that he had
ordered to be done, nothing had been omitted. Well pleased the duke was
returning along the road to his chateau in the evening twilight. Behind him was
the city of Orleans, the broad and deep Loire rolling beneath its walls, and the
peaceful darkness gathering round its towers. Alas! before another sun shall
set, there will not be left in that city anything in which is the breath of
life. The blood of mother and helpless babe, of stern warrior, grey patriarch,
and blooming maiden, will be blent in one red torrent, which shall rival the
Loire in depth. It is a great sacrifice, but one demanded for the salvation of
France. By the side of the road, partly hidden by two walnut-trees that grow on
the spot, sits a figure on horseback, waiting for the approach of some one. He
hears the sound of horses' hoofs. It is the duke that is coming; he knows him by
his white plume; he permits him to pass, then slipping up close behind him,
discharges his pistol. The ball entered the right shoulder of the duke–for he
wore no cuirass–and passed through the chest. The duke bent for a moment upon
his horse's mane, but instantly resuming his erect position in the saddle, he
declared his belief that the wound was slight, and added good-humoredly, "They
owed me this." It was soon seen, however, that the wound was mortal, and his
attendants crowding round him, carried him to his house, and laid him on the bed
from which he was to rise no more.
The assassin was John Poltrot, a petty
nobleman of Angoumois, whom the duke's butcheries, and his own privations, had
worked up into a fanaticism as sincere and as criminal as that of the duke
himself. The horror of the crime seems to have bewildered him, for instead of
making his escape on his fine Spanish horse, he rode round and round the spot
where the deed had been done, all night,[16] and when morning broke he
was apprehended. He at first charged Coligny with being privy to the murder, and
afterwards denied it. The admiral indignantly repudiated the accusation, and
demanded to be confronted with Poltrot.[17] The Government hurried on
the execution of the assassin, and thus showed its disbelief in the charge he
had advanced against Coligny, by preventing the opportunity of authenticating an
allegation which, had they been able to substantiate it, would have done much to
bring strength and credit to their cause, and in the same proportion to disgrace
and damage that of the Huguenots.
We return to the duke, who was now fast
approaching his latter end. Death set some things in a new light. His belief in
Roman Catholicism it did not shake, but it filled him with remorse for the cruel
measures by which he had endeavored to support it. He forgave his enemies, he
asked that his blood might not be revenged, he confessed his infidelities to his
duchess,[18] who stood beside him
dissolved in tears, and he earnestly counselled Catherine de Medici to make
peace with the Huguenots, saying "that it was so necessary, that whoever should
oppose it ought to be deemed an impious man, and an enemy to the king and the
kingdom."[19]
The death of the
Duke of Guise redeems somewhat the many dark passages in his life, and the
sorrow into which he was melted at his latter end moderates the horror we feel
at his bigotry and the cruel excesses into which it hurried him. But it more
concerns us to note that he died at the moment when he had attained that proud
summit he had long striven to reach. He was sole Triumvir: he was at the head of
the army: all the powers of government were gathered into his single hand:
Huguenotism was at his feet: his arm was raised to crush it, when, in the words
of Pasquier, his "horn was lowered."
The death of the Duke of Guise threw
the government into the hands of Catherine de Medici. It was now that this
woman, whom death seemed ever to serve, reached the summit of her wishes. Her
son, Charles IX, reigned, but the mother governed. In presence of the duke's
bier, Catherine was not indisposed to peace with the Protestants, but it was of
her nature to work crookedly in all that she undertook. She had the Prince of
Conde in the Louvre with her, and she set herself to weave her toils around him.
Taken prisoner on the battle-field, as we have already said, "he was breathing,"
says Hezeray, "the soft air of the court," and the Queen-mother made haste to
conclude the negotiations for peace before Coligny should arrive, who might not
be so pliant as Conde. The prince had a conference with several of the
Protestant ministers, who were unanimously of opinion that no peace could be
satisfactory or honorable unless it restored, without restriction or
modification, the Edict of January, which gave to all the Reformed in France the
liberty of public worship. The Queen-mother and Conde, however, patched up a
Pacification of a different kind. They agreed on a treaty, of which the leading
provisions were that the nobles should have liberty to celebrate the Reformed
worship in their castles, that the same privilege should be granted to certain
of the gentry, and that a place should be set apart in certain only of the
towns, where the Protestants might meet for worship.
This arrangement
came far short of the Edict of January, which knew no restriction of class or
place in the matter of worship, but extended toleration to all the subjects of
the realm. This new treaty did nothing for the pastors: it did nothing for the
great body of the people, save that it did not hinder them from holding opinions
in their own breasts, and celebrating, it might be, their worship at their own
firesides. This peace was signed by the king at Ambose on the 19th April, 1563;
it was published before the camp at Orleans on the 22nd, amid the murmurs of the
soldiers, who gave vent to their displeasure by the demolition of some images
which, till that time, had been permitted to repose quietly in their niches.[20] This edict was termed the
"Pacification of Amboise." When the Admiral de Coligny was told of it he said
indignantly, "This stroke of the pen has ruined more churches than our enemies
could have knocked down in ten years."[21] Returning by forced
marches to Orleans in the hope of finding better terms, Coligny arrived just the
day after the treaty had been signed and sealed.
Such was the issue of
the first Huguenot war. If the Protestants had won no victory on the
battle-field, their cause nevertheless was in a far stronger position now than
when the campaign opened. The Triumvirs were gone; the Roman Catholic armies
were without a leader, and the national exchequer was empty; while, on the other
side, at the head of the Huguenot host was now the most skillful captain of his
age. If the Huguenot nobles had had the wisdom and the courage to demand full
toleration of their worship, the Government would not have dared to refuse it,
seeing they were not in circumstances at the time to do so; but the Protestants
were not true to themselves at this crisis, and so the hour passed, and with it
all the golden opportunities it had brought. New enemies stood up, and new
tempests darkened the sky of France.
CHAPTER
10 Back to
Top
CATHERINE DE MEDICI AND HER SON,
CHARLES IX– CONFERENCE AT BAYONNE–THE ST. BARTHOLOMEW MASSACRE
PLOTTED.
The Peace Satisfactory to Neither Party–Catherine de Medici
comes to the Front–The Dance of Death at the Louvre–What will Catherine's Policy
be–the Sword or the Olive-branch?–Charles IX–His Training–A Royal
Progress–Iconoclast Outrages–Indignation of Charles IX–The Envoys of the Duke of
Savoy and the Pope– Bayonne–Its Chateau–Nocturnal Interviews between Catherine
de Medici and the Duke of Alva–Agreed to Exterminate the Protestants of France
and England–Testimony of Davila–of Tavannes–of Maimbourg–Plot to be Executed at
Moulins, 1566–Postponed.
The Pacification of Amboise (1563) closed the first
Huguenot war. That arrangement was satisfactory to neither party. The
Protestants it did not content; for manifestly it was not an advance but a
retrogression. That toleration which the previous Edict of January had extended
over the whole kingdom, the Pacification of Amboise restricted to certain
bodies, and to particular localities. The Huguenots could not understand the
principle on which such an arrangement was based. If liberty of worship was
wrong, they reasoned, why permit it in any part of France? but if right, as the
edict seemed to grant, it ought to be declared lawful, not in a few cities only,
but in all the towns of the kingdom.
Besides, the observance of the
Amboise edict was obviously impracticable. Were nine-tenths of the Protestants
to abstain altogether from public worship? This they must do under the present
law, or undertake a journey of fifty or, it might be, a hundred miles to the
nearest privileged city. A law that makes itself ridiculous courts contempt, and
provokes to disobedience.
Moreover, the Pacification of Amboise was
scarcely more to the taste of the Romanists. The concessions it made to the
Huguenots, although miserable in the extreme, and accompanied by restrictions
that made them a mockery, were yet, in the opinion of zealous Papists, far too
great to be made to men to whom it was sinful to make any concession at all. On
both sides, therefore, the measure was simply unworkable; perhaps it never was
intended by its devisers to be anything else. In places where they were
numerous, the Protestants altogether disregarded it, assembling in thousands and
worshipping openly, just as though no Pacification existed. And the Roman
Catholics on their part assailed with violence the assemblies of the Reformed,
even in those places which had been set apart by law for the celebration of
their worship; thus neither party accepted the arrangement as a final one. Both
felt that they must yet look one another in the face on the battle-field; but
the Roman Catholics were not ready to un- sheathe the sword, and so for a brief
space there was quiet–a suspension of hostilities if not peace.
It was
now that the star of Catherine de Medici rose so triumphantly into the
ascendant. The clouds which had obscured its luster hitherto were all dispelled,
and it blazed forth in baleful splendor in the firmantent of France. It was
thirty years since Catherine, borne over the waters of the Mediterranean in the
gaily-decked galleys of Pisa, entered the port of Marseilles, amid the roar of
cannon and the shouts of assembled thousands, to give her hand in marriage to
the second son of the King of France. She was then a girl of sixteen, radiant as
the country from which she came, her eyes all fire, her face all smiles, a
strange witchery in her every look and movement; but in contrast with these
fascinations of person was her soul, which was encompassed with a gloomy
superstition, that might more fittingly be styled a necromancy than a faith. She
came with a determined purpose of making the proud realm on which she had just
stepped bow to her will, and minister to her pleasures, although it should be by
sinking it into a gulf of pollution or drowning it in an ocean of blood. Thirty
years had she waited, foreseeing the goal afar off, and patiently bending to
obstacles she had not the power summarily to annihilate.
Death had been
the steady and faithful ally of this extraordinary woman. Often had he visited
the Louvre since the daughter of the House of Medici came to live under its
roof; and each visit had advanced the Florentine a stage on her way to power.
First, the death of the Dauphin–who left no child–opened her way to the throne.
Then the death of her father-in-law, Francis I, placed her on that throne by the
side of Henry II. She had the crown, but not yet the kingdom; for Diana of
Poictiers, as the mistress, more than divided the influence which ought to have
been Catherine's as the wife. The death of her husband took that humiliating
impediment out of her way. But Mary Stuart, the niece of the Guises, and the
wife of the weak-minded Francis II, profited by the imbecility through which
Catherine had hoped to govern. Death, however, removed this obstacle, as he had
done every previous one, by striking down Francis II only seventeen short months
after he had ascended the throne. Once more there stood up another rival, and
Catherine had still to wait. Now it was that the Triumvirate rose and grasped
with powerful hand the direction of France, Was the patience of the Italian
woman to be always baulked? No: Death came again to her help. The fortune of
battle and the pistol of the assassin rid her of the Triumvirate.
The
Duke of Guise was dead: rival to her power there no longer existed. The way so
long barred was open now, and Cathelqne boldly placed herself at the head of
affairs; and this position she continued to hold, with increasing calamity to
France and deepening infamy to herself, till almost her last hour. This long
delay, although it appeared to be adverse, was in reality in favor of the
Queen-mother. If it gave her power late, it gave it her all the more securely.
When her hour at last came, it found her in the full maturity of her faculties.
She had had time to study, not only individual men, but all the parties into
which France was divided. She had a perfect comprehension of the genius and
temper of the nation. Consummate mistress of an art not difficult of attainment
to an Italian–the art of dissembling–with an admirable intellect for intrigue,
with sense enough not to scheme too finely, and with a patience long trained in
the school of waiting, and not so likely to hurry on measures till they were
fully ripened, it was hardly possible but that the daughter of the Medici would
show herself equal to any emergency, and would leave behind her a monument which
should tell the France of after times that Catherine de Medici had once governed
it.
Standing as she now did on the summit, it was natural that Catherine
should look around her, and warily choose the part she was to play. She had
outlived all her rivals at court, and the Huguenots were now the only party she
had to fear. Should she, after the example of the Guises, continue to pursue
them with the sword, or should she hold out to them the olive-branch? Catherine
felt that she never could be one with the Huguenots. That would imply a breach
with all the traditions of her house, and a change in the whole habits of her
life, which was not to be thought of. Nor could she permit France to embrace the
Protestant creed, for the country would thus descend in the scale of nations,
and would embroil itself in a war with Italy and Spain. But, on the other side,
there were several serious considerations which had to be looked at. The
Huguenots were a powerful party; their faith was spreading in France; their
counsels were guided and their armies were led by the men of the greatest
character and intellect in the nation. Moreover, they had friends in Germany and
England, who were not likely to look quietly on while they were being crushed by
arms. To continue the war seemed very unadvisable. Catherine had no general able
to cope with Coligny, and it was uncertain on which side victory might
ultimately declare itself. The Huguenot army was inferior in numbers to that of
the Roman Catholics, but it surpassed it in bravery, in devotion, and
discipline; and the longer the conflict lasted, the more numerous the soldiers
that flocked to the Huguenot standard.
It was tolerably clear that
Catherine must conciliate the Protestants, yet all the while she must labor to
diminish their numbers, to weaken their influence, and curtail their privileges,
in the hope that at some convenient moment, which future years might bring, she
might be able to fall upon them and cut them off, either by sudden war or by
secret masssacre. Doubtless what she now sketched was a policy of a general
kind: content to fix its great outlines, and leave its details to be filled in
afterwards, as circumstances might arise and opportunity offer. Accordingly, the
Huguenots had gracious looks and soft words, but no substantial benefits, from
the Queen-mother. There was a truce to open hostilities; but blood was flowing
all the time. Private murder stalked through France; and short as the period was
since the Pacification had been signed, not fewer than three thousand Huguenots
had fallen by the poignard of the assassin. In truth, there was no longer in
France only one nation. There were now two nations on its soil. The perfidy and
wrong which had marked the whole policy of the court had so deeply parted the
Huguenot and Romanist, that not the hope only, but the wish for conciliation had
passed away. The part Catherine de Medici had imposed upon herself–of standing
well with both, and holding the poise between the two, yet ever making the
preponderance of encouragement and favor to fall on the Roman Catholic side–was
an extremely difficult one; but her Italian nature and her discipline of thirty
years made the task, which to another would have been impossible, to her
comparatively easy.
Her first care was to mould her son, Charles IX, into
her own likeness, and fit him for being an instrument, pliant and expert, for
her purposes. Intellectually he was superior to his brother Francis II, who
during his short reign had been treated by both wife and mother as an imbecile,
and when dead was buried like a pauper. Charles IX is said to have discovered
something of the literary taste and aesthetic appreciation which were the
redeeming features in the character of his grandfather Francis I. In happier
circumstances he might have become a patron of the arts, and have found scope
for his fitful energy in the hunting-field; but what manly grace or noble
quality could flourish in an air so fetid as that of the Louvre? The atmosphere
in which he grew up was foul with corruption, impiety, and blood. To fawn on
those he mortally disliked, to cover bitter thoughts with sweet smiles and to
caress till ready to strike, were the unmanly and un-kingly virtues in which
Charles was trained. His mother sent all the way to her own native city of
Florence for a man to superintend the education of the prince–Albert Gondi,
afterwards created Duke of Retz.
Of this man, the historian Brantome has
drawn the following character: – "Cunning, corrupt, a liar, a great dissembler,
swearing and denying God like a sergeant." Under such a teacher, it is not
difficult to conceive what the pupil would become; by no chance could he
contract the slightest acquaintance with virtue or honor. What a spectacle we
are contemplating! At the head of a great nation is a woman without moral
principle, without human pity, without shame: a very tigress, and she is rearing
her son as the tigress rears her cubs. Unhappy France, what a dark future begins
to project its shadow across thee!
In the summer of 1565, Catherine and
her son made a royal progress through France. A brilliant retinue, composed of
the princes of the blood, the great officers of state, the lords and ladies of
the court–the dimness of their virtues concealed beneath the splendor of their
robes followed in the train of the Queen-mother and the royal scion. The
wondering provinces sent out their inhabitants in thousands to gaze on the
splendid cavalcade, as it swept comet-like past them. This progress enabled
Catherine to judge for herself of the relative strength of the two parties in
her dominions, and to shape her measures accordingly. Onward she went from
province to province, and from city to city, scattering around her prodigally,
yet judiciously, smiles, promises, and frowns; and who knew so well as she when
to be gracious, and when to affect a stern displeasure? In those places where
the Protestants had avenged upon the stone images the outrages which the Roman
Catholics had committed upon living men, Catherine took care to intimate
emphatically her disapproval. Her piety was hurt at the sight of the demolition
of objects elevated to sacred uses.
She took special care that her son's
attention should be drawn to those affecting mementoes of Huguenot iconoclast
zeal. In some parts monasteries demolished, crosses overturned, images
mutilated, offered a spectacle exceedingly depressing to pious souls, and over
which the devout and tender-hearted daughter of the Medici could scarcely
refrain from shedding tears. How detestable the nature of that religion–so was
the king taught to view the matter–which could prompt to acts so atrocious and
impious! He felt that his kingdom had been polluted, and he trembled– not with a
well-reigned terror like his mother, but a real dread lest God, who had been
affronted by these daring acts of sacrilege, should smite France with judgment;
for in that age stone statues and crosses, and not divine precepts or moral
virtues, were religion. The impression made upon the mind of the young king,
especially in the southern provinces, where it seemed as if this impiety had
reached its climax in a general sack of holy buildings and sacred furniture, was
never, it is said, forgotten by him. It is believed to have inspired his policy
in after-years.[1]
The Queen-mother
had another object in view in the progress she was now making. It enabled her,
without attracting observation, to gather the sentiments of the neighboring
sovereigns on the great question of the age –namely, Protestantism–and to come
to a common understanding with them respecting the measures to be adopted for
its suppression. The kings of the earth were "plotting against the Lord and his
anointed," and although willingly submitting to the cords with which the chief
ruler of the Seven-hilled City had bound them, they were seeking how they might
break the bands of that King whom God hath set upon the holy hill of Zion. The
great ones of the earth did not understand the Reformation, and trembled before
it. A power which the sword could slay would have caused them little uneasiness;
but a power which had been smitten with the sword, which had been trodden down
by armies, which had been burned at the stake, but which refused to die–a power
which the oftener it was defeated the mightier it became, which started up anew
to the confusion of its enemies from what appeared to be its grave, was a new
thing in the earth. There was a mystery about it which made it a terror to them.
They knew not whence it came, nor whereunto it might grow, nor how it was "to be
met." Still the sword was the only weapon they knew to wield, and this caused
them to meet often together to consult and plot.
The Council of Trent,
which had just closed its sittings, had recommended–indeed enjoined–a league
among the Roman Catholic sovereigns and States for the forcible suppression of
the Reformed opinions; and Philip II of Spain took the lead in this matter, as
became his position. His morose and fanatical genius scarcely needed the
prompting of the Council. Catherine de Medici was now on her way to meet the
envoy of this man, and to agree on a policy which should bind together in a
common action the two crowns of Spain and France. Her steps were directed to
Bayonne, the south-western extremity of her dominions; but her route thither was
circuitous–being so on purpose that she might, under show of mutual
congratulations, collect the sentiments of neighboring rulers. As she skirted
along by the Savoy Alps, she had an interview with the ambassador of the Duke of
Savoy, who carried back Catherine's good wishes, and other things besides, to
his master. At Avignon, the capital of the Papacy when Rome was too turbulent to
afford safe residence to her Popes, Catherine halted to give audience to the
Papal legate. She then pushed forward to Bayonne, where she was to meet the Duke
of Alva, who, as the spokesman of the then mightiest monarch in Christendom, was
a more important personage than the other ambassadors to whom she had already
given audience. There a final decision was to be come to.
The royal
calvacade now drew nigh that quiet spot on the shores of the Bay of Biscay
where, amid flourishing plantations and shrubs of almost tropical luxuriance,
and lines of strong forts, nestles the little town of Bayonne–the "good bay"–a
name its history has sadly belied. A narrow firth, which terminates in a little
bay, admits the waters of the Atlantic within the walls of the town, and permits
the ships of friendly Powers to lie under the shelter of its guns. The azure
tops of the Pyrenees appearing in the south notify to the traveler that he has
almost touched the frontier of Spain. Here, in the chateau which still stands
crowning the height on the right of the harbor, Catherine de Medici met the
plenipotentiary of Philip II.[2] The King of Spain did not
come in person, but sent his wife Elizabeth, the daughter of this same Catherine
de Medici, and sister of Charles IX. Along with his queen came Philip's general,
the well-known Duke of Alva.
This man was inspired with an insane fury
against Protestantism, which, meeting a fanaticism equally ferocious on the part
of his master, was a link between the two. Alva was the right hand of Philip; he
was his counsellor in all evil; and by the sword of Alva it was that Philip shed
those oceans of blood in which he sought to drown Protestantism. Here, in this
chateau, the dark sententious Spaniard met the crafty and eloquent Italian
woman. Catherine made a covered gallery be constructed in it, that she might
visit the duke whenever it suited her without being observed.[3] Their meetings were mostly
nocturnal, but as no one was admitted to them, the precise schemes discussed at
them, and the plots hatched, must, unless the oaken walls shall speak out,
remain secrets till the dread Judgment-day, save in so far as they may be
guessed at from the events which flowed from them, and which have found a place
on the page of history. It is certain from an expression of Alva's, caught up by
the young son of the Queen of Navarre, the future Henry IV–whose sprightliness
had won for him a large place in Catherine's affections, and whom she at times
permitted to go with her to the duke's apartments, thinking the matters talked
of there altogether beyond the boy's capacity–that massacre was mooted at these
interviews, and was relied upon as one of the main methods for cleansing
Christendom from the heresy of Calvin. The expression has been recorded by all
historians with slight verbal differences, but substantial identity.
The
idea was embodied by the duke in a vulgar but most expressive metaphor– namely,
"The head of one salmon is worth that of ten thousand frogs." This expression,
occurring as it did in a conversation in which the names of the Protestant
leaders figured prominently, explained its meaning sufficiently to the young but
precocious Henry of Navarre. He communicated it to the lord who waited upon him.
This nobleman sent it in cipher to the prince's mother, Jeanne d'Albret, and by
her it was communicated to the heads of Protestantism. All the Protestant
chiefs, both in France and Germany, looked upon it as the foreshadowing of some
terrible tragedy, hatched in this chateau, between the daughter of the fanatical
House of Medici and the sanguinary lieutenant of Philip II.
Retained
meanwhile in the darkness of these two bosoms, and it might be of one or two
others, the secret was destined to write itself one day on the face of Europe in
characters of blood; whispered in the deep stillness of these oaken chambers, it
was soon to break in a thunder-crash upon the world, and roll its dread
reverberations along history's page till the end of time. This, in all
probability, was what was resolved upon at these conferences at Bayonne. The
conspirators did not plan a particular massacre, to come off on a particular day
of a particular year; what they agreed upon was rather a policy towards the
Protestants of treachery and murder, which however, should circumstances favor,
might any day explode in a catastrophe of European dimensions.
"The Queen
of Spain," says Davila, narrating the meeting at Bayonne, "being come to this
place, accompanied with the Duke of Alva and the Count de Beneventa, whilst they
made show with triumphs, tournaments, and several kinds of pastimes, as if they
had in eye nothing but amusement and feasting, there was held a secret
conference in order to arrive at a mutual understanding between the two crowns.
Their common interest being weighed and considered, they agreed in this, that it
was expedient for one king to aid and assist the other in pacifying their States
and purging them from diversity of religions. But they were not of the same
opinion as to the way that was most expeditious and secure for arriving at this
end... The duke said that a prince could not do a thing more unworthy or
prejudicial to himself than to permit liberty of conscience to his people,
bringing as many varieties of religion into a State as there are fancies in the
minds of men; that diversities of opinion never faded to put subjects in arms,
and stir up grievous treacheries and rebellions; therefore, he concluded that
they ought by severe remedies, no matter whether by fire or sword, to cut away
the roots of that evil."[4]
The historian says
that the Queen-mother was inclined to milder measures, in the first place, being
indisposed to embrue her hands in the blood of the royal family, and of the
great lords of the kingdom, and that she would reserve this as the last resort.
"Both parties," says he, "aimed at the destruction of the Huguenots, and the
establishment of obedience. Wherefore, at last they came to this conclusion,
that the one king should aid the other either covertly or openly, as might be
thought most conducive to the execution of so difficult and so weighty an
enterprise, but that both of them should be free to work by such means and
counsels as appeared to them most proper and seasonable."[5]
Tavannes, whose
testimony is above suspicion, confirms the statement of Davila. "The Kings of
France and Spain at Bayonne," says he in his Memoires, "through the
instrumentality of the Duke of Alva, resolved on the destruction of the
Huguenots of France and Spain."[6] Maimbourg reiterates the
same thing. "The two kings came to an agreement," says he, "to exterminate all
the Protestants in their dominions."[7]
The massacre, it is
now believed, was to have been executed in the year following (1566) at the
Assembly of Notables at Moulins. But meanwhile the dark secret of Bayonne had
oozed out in so many quarters, that Conde and Coligny could not with prudence
disregard it, and though they came, with their confederates, to Moulins, in
obedience to the royal summons, they were so well armed that Catherine de Medici
durst not attempt her grand stroke.
CHAPTER
11 Back to
Top
SECOND AND THIRD HUGUENOT
WARS.
Peace of Longjumeau–Second Huguenot War–Its One Battle–A Peace
which is not Peace – Third Huguenot War–Conspiracy–An Incident –Protestant
Chiefs at La Rochelle–Joined by the Queen of Navarre and the Prince of
Bearn–Battle of Jarnac–Death of the Prince of Conde– Heroism of Jeanne
d'Albret–Disaster at Montcontour – A Dark Night –Misfortunes of Coligny–His
Sublimity of Soul.
We return to the consideration of the condition of
the Protestants of France. The Pacification of Amboise, imperfect from the
first, was now flagrantly violated. The worshipping assemblies of the
Protestants were dispersed, their persons murdered, their ministers banished or
silenced; and for these wrongs they could obtain no redress. The iron circle was
continually narrowing around them. Were they to sit still until they were
inextricably enfolded and crushed? No; they must again draw the sword. The court
brought matters to extremity by hiring 6,000 Swiss mercenaries.
On
hearing of this, the Prince de Conde held a consultation with the Huguenot
chiefs. Opinions were divided. Coligny advised a little longer delay. "I see
perfectly well," said he, "how we may light the fire, but I do not see the water
to put it out." His brother D'Andelot counselled instant action. "If you wait,"
he exclaimed, "till you are driven into banishment in foreign countries, bound
in prisons, hunted doom by the mob, of what avail, will our patience be? Those
who have brought 6,000 foreign soldiers to our very hearths have thereby
declared war already." Conde and Coligny went to the Queen to entreat that
justice might be done the Reformed. Catherine was deaf to their appeal. They
next–acting on a precedent set them by the Duke of Guise five years
before–attempted to seize the persons of the King and Queen-mother, at their
Castle of Monceaux, in Brie. The plot being discovered, the court saved itself
by a hasty flight. The Swiss had not yet arrived, and Catherine, safe again in
Paris, amused the Protestants with negotiations. "The free exercise of their
religion" was the one ever-reiterated demand of the Huguenots. At last the Swiss
arrived, the negotiations were broken off, and now nothing remained but all
appeal to arms.
This brings us to the second civil war, which we shall
dispatch in a few sentences. The second Huguenot war was a campaign of but one
battle, which lasted barely an hour. This affair, styled the Battle of St.
Denis, was fought under the walls of Paris, and the field was left in possession
of the Huguenots,[1] who offered the royalists
battle on the following day, but they declined it, so giving the Protestants the
right of claiming the victory.
The veteran Montmorency, who had held the
high office of Constable of France during four reigns, was among the slain. The
Duke of Anjou, the favorite son of Catherine, succeeded him as generalissimo of
the French army, and thus the chief authority was still more completely centred
in the hands of the Queen-mother. The winter months passed without fighting.
When the spring opened, the Protestant forces were so greatly reinforced by
auxiliaries from Germany, that the court judged it the wiser part to come to
terms with them, and on March 20th, 1568, the short-lived Peace of Longjumeau
was signed. "This peace," says Mezeray, "left the Huguenots at the mercy of
their enemies, with no other security than the word of an Italian woman."[2]
The army under
Conde melted away, and then Catherine forgot her promise. All the while the
peace lasted, which was only six short months, the Protestants had to endure
even greater miseries than if they had been in the field with arms in their
hands. Again the pulpits thundered against heresy, again the passions of the mob
broke out, again the dagger of the assassin was set to work, and the blood of
the Huguenots ceased not to flow in all the cities and provinces of France. It
is estimated that not fewer than ten thousand persons perished during this short
period. The court did nothing to restrain, but much, it is believed, to
instigate to these murders.
One gets weary of writing so monotonous a
recital of outrage and massacre. This bloodshed, it must be acknowledged, was
not all confined to one side. Some two hundred Roman Catholics, including
several priests, were massacred by the Protestants. This is to be deplored, but
it need surprise no one. Of the hundreds of thousands of Huguenots in France,
all were not pious men; and further, while these two hundred or so of Romanists
were murdered, the Huguenots were perishing in tens of thousands by every
variety of cruel death, and of shocking and shameful outrage. There was no
justice in the land. The crew that occupied the Louvre, and styled themselves
the Government, were there, as the Thug is in his den, to entrap and dispatch
his victim. There were men in France doubtless who reasoned that, although the
laws of society had fallen, the laws of nature were still in
force.
Matters were brought to a head by the discovery of a plot which
was to be immediately executed. At a council in the Louvre, it was resolved to
seize the two Protestant chiefs, the Prince of Conde and Admiral Coligny– and
put them out of the way, by consigning the first to a dungeon for life, and
sending the second to the scaffold. The moment they were informed of the plot,
the prince and the admiral fled with their wives and children to La Rochelle.
The road was long and the journey toilsome. They had to traverse three hundred
miles of rough country, obstructed by rivers, and beset by the worse dangers of
numerous foes. An incident which befel them by the way touched their hearts
deeply, as showing the hand of God. Before them was the Loire–a broad and rapid
river. The bridges were watched. How were they to cross? A friendly guide, to
whom the by-paths and fords were known, conducted them to the river's banks
opposite Sancerre, and at that point the company, amounting to nearly two
hundred persons, crossed without inconvenience or risk. They all went over
singing the psalm, When Israel went out of Egypt. Two hours after, the heavens
blackened, and the rain falling in torrents, the waters of the Loire, which a
little before had risen only to their horses' knees, were now swollen, and had
become impassable. In a little while they saw their pursuers arrive on the
further side of the river; but their progress was stayed by the deep and angry
flood, to which they dared not commit themselves. "Escaped as a bird out of the
snare of the fowlers," the company of Coligny exchanged looks of silent
gratitude with one another.[3]
What remained of
their way was gone with lighter heart and nimbler foot; they felt, although they
could not see, the Almighty escort that covered them; and so, journeying on,
they came at last safely to La Rochelle.
La Rochelle was at this period a
great mark of trade. Its inhabitants shared the independence of sentiment which
commerce commonly brings in its train, having early embraced the Reformation,
the bulk of its inhabitants were by this time Protestants. An impression was
abroad that another great crisis impended; and under this belief, too well
founded, all the chiefs and captains of the army were repairing with their
followers to this stronghold of Huguenotism. We have seen Conde and Coligny
arrive here; and soon thereafter came another illustrious visitor–Jeanne
d'Albret. The Queen of Navarre did not come alone; she brought with her, her son
Henry, Prince of Bearn, whose heroic character was just then beginning to open,
and whom his mother, in that dark hour, dedicated to the service of the
Protestant cause. This arrival awakened the utmost enthusiasm in La Rochelle
among both citizens and soldiers. Conde laid his command of the Huguenot army at
the feet of the young Prince of Bearn–magnanimously performing an act which the
conventional notions of the age exacted of him, for Henry was nearer the throne
than himself. The magnanimity of Conde evoked an equal magnanimity. "No," said
Jeanne d'Albret; "I and my son are here to promote the success of this great
enterprise, or to share its disaster. We will joyfully unite beneath the
standard of Conde. The cause of God is dearer to me than my son."
At this
juncture the Queen-mother published an edict, revoking the Edict of January,
forbidding, on pain of death, the profession of Protestantism, and commanding
all ministers to leave the kingdom within a fortnight.[4] If anything was wanting to
complete the justification of the Protestants, in this their third war, it was
now supplied. During the winter of 1569, the two armies were frequently in
presence of one another; but as often as they essayed to join battle, storms of
unprecedented violence broke out, and the assailants had to bow to the superior
force of the elements. At last, on the 15th March, they met on the field of
Jarnac. The day was a disastrous one for the Protestants. Taken at unawares, the
Huguenot regiments arrived one after the other on the field, and were butchered
in detail, the enemy assailing in overwhelming numbers. The Prince of Conde,
after performing prodigies of valor, wounded, unhorsed, and fighting desperately
on his knees, was slain.[5] Coligny, judging it
hopeless to prolong the carnage, retired with his soldiers from the field; and
the result of the day as much elated the court and the Roman Catholics, as it
engendered despondency and despair in the hearts of the Protestants. While the
Huguenot army was in this mood–beaten by their adversaries, and in danger of
being worse beaten by their fears–the Queen of Navarre suddenly appeared amongst
them. Attended by Coligny, she rode along their ranks, having on one hand her
son, the Prince of Bearn, and on the other her nephew, Henry, son of the fallen
Conde. "Children of God and of France," said she, addressing the soldiers,
"Conde is dead; but is all therefore lost? No; the God who gave him courage and
strength to fight for this cause, has raised up others worthy to succeed him. To
those brave warriors I add my son. Make proof of his valor: Soldiers! I offer
you everything I have to give–my dominions, my treasures, my life, and what is
dearer to me than all, my children. I swear to defend to my last sigh the holy
cause that now unites us!" With these heroic words she breathed her own spirit
into the soldiers. They looked up; they stood erect; the fire returned to their
eyes. Henry of Navarre was proclaimed general of the army, amid the plaudits of
the soldiers; and Coligny and the other chiefs were the first to swear fidelity
to the hero, to whom the whole realm was one day to vow allegiance.
Thus
the disaster of Jarnac was so far repaired; but a yet deeper reverse awaited the
Huguenot arms. The summer which opened so ominously passed without any affair of
consequence till the 3rd of October, and then came the fatal battle of
Montcontour. It was an inconvenient moment for Coligny to fight, for his German
auxiliaries had just mutinied; but no alternative was left him. The Huguenots
rushed with fury into action; but their ranks were broken by the firm phalanxes
on which they threw themselves, and before they could rally, a tremendous
slaughter had begun, which caused something like a panic amongst them. Coligny
was wounded at the very commencement; his lower jaw was broken, and the blood,
oozing from the wound and trickling down his throat, all but choked him. Being
unable to give the word of command, he was carried out of the battle. A short
hour only did the fight rage; but what disasters were crowded into that space of
time! Of the 25,000 men whom Coligny had led into action, only 8,000 stood
around their standards when it was ended. Ammunition, cannon, baggage, and
numerous colors were lost. Again the dark night was closing in around French
Protestantism.
As Coligny was being carried out of the field, another
litter in which lay a wounded soldier passed him by. The occupant of that other
litter was Lestrange, an old gentleman, and one of the admiral's chief
counsellors. Lestrange, happening to draw aside the curtains and look out,
recognised his general. "Yes," said he, brushing away a tear that dimmed his
eye–" Yes, God is very sweet." This was all he spoke. It was as if a Divine hand
had dropped a cordial into the soul of Coligny. Speaking afterwards to his
friends of the incident, he said that these words were as balm to his spirit,
then more bruised than his body. There is here a lesson for us–nay, many
lessons, though we can particularize only one. We are apt to suppose that those
exemplify the highest style of piety, and enjoy most of the Spirit's presence,
who are oftenest in the closet engaged in acts of devotion, and that controversy
and fighting belong to a lower type of Christianity. There are exceptions, of
course; but the rule, we believe, is the opposite. We must distinguish between a
contentious lot and a contentious spirit; the former has been assigned to some
of the most loving natures, and the most spiritual of men. That is the
healthiest piety that best endures the wear and tear of hard work, just as those
are the healthiest plants which, in no danger of pining away without the shelter
of a hot-house, flourish in the outer air, and grow tall, and strong, and
beautiful amid the rains and tempests of the open firmament. So now: breaking
through the clouds and dust of the battle-field, a ray from heaven shot into the
soul of Coligny.
The admiral had now touched the lowest point of his
misfortunes. We have seen him borne out of the battle, vanquished and wounded
almost to death. His army lay stretched on the field. The few who had escaped
the fate of their comrades were dispirited and mutinous. Death had narrowed the
circle of his friends, and of those who remained, some forsook him, and others
even blamed him. To crown these multiplied calamities, Catherine de Medici came
forward to deal him the coup de grace. At her direction the Parliament of Paris
proclaimed him an outlaw, and set a price of 30,000 crowns upon his head. His
estates were confiscated, his Castle of Chatillon was burned to the ground, and
he was driven forth homeless and friendless. Were his miseries now complete? Not
yet. Pius V cursed him as "all infamous, execrable man, if indeed he deserved
the name of man." It was now that Coligny appeared greatest. Furious tempests
assailed him from all quarters at once, but he did not bow to their violence. In
the presence of defeat, desertion, outlawry, and the bitter taunts and curses of
his enemies, his magnanimity remained unsubdued, and his confidence in God
unshaken. A glorious triumph yet awaited the cause that was now so low. Perish
it could not, and with it he knew would revive his now sore-tarnished name and
fame.
He stood upon a rock, and the serenity of soul which he enjoyed,
while these tempests were raging at his feet, is finely shown in the letters
which at that time he addressed to his children for his wife, the heroic
Charlotte Laval, was dead two years, and saw not the evil that came upon her
house. "We must follow Jesus Christ," wrote Coligny (October 16th, 1569), "our
Captain, who has marched before us. Men have stripped us of all they could; and
if this is still the will of God, we shall be happy, and our condition good,
seeing this loss has not happened through any injury we have done to those who
have inflicted it, but solely through the hatred they bear toward me, because it
has pleased God to make use of me to aid his Church. For the present, it
suffices that I admonish and conjure you, in the name of God, to persevere
courageously in the study of virtue."
CHAPTER
12 Back to
Top
SYNOD OF LA
ROCHELLE.
Success as Judged by Man and by God—Coligny's Magnanimous
Counsels—A New Huguenot Army—Dismay of the Court—Peace of St.
Germain-en-Laye—Terms of Treaty—Perfidiousness—Religion on the
Battle-field—Synod of La Rochelle — Numbers and Rank of its Members —It Ratifies
the Doctrine and Constitution of the French Church as Settled at its First
Synod.
We left Protestantism in France, and its greatest
champion, Admiral de Coligny, reeling under what seemed to be a mortal blow. The
Prince of Conde was dead; the battle of Montcontour had been lost; the army
mostly lay rotting on the field; and a mere handful of soldiers only remained
around the standard of their chief. Many who had befriended the cause till now
abandoned it in despair, and such as still remained faithful were greatly
disheartened, and counseled submission. Catherine de Medici, as we have seen,
thinking that now was the hour of opportunity, hastened to deal what she did not
doubt would be the finishing blow to the Protestant cause, and to the man who
was preeminently its chief. It was now, in the midst of these misibrtunes, that
Coligny towered up, and reached the full stature of his moral greatness; and
with him, rising from its ashes, soared up anew the Protestant
cause.
Success in the eye of the world is one thing; success in the eye
of God is another and a different thing. When men are winning battles, and every
day adding to the number of their friends, and the greatness of their honored—
"These men," says the world, "are marching on to victory." But when to a cause
or to a party there comes defeat after defeat, when friends forsake, and
calamities thicken, the world sees nothing but disaster, and prognosticates only
ruin. Yet these thing may be but the necessary steps to
success.
Chastened by these sore dispensations, they who are engaged in
the work of God are compelled to turn from man, and to fortify themselves by a
yet more entire and exclusive reliance on the Almighty. They cleanse themselves
from the vitiating stains of flattery and human praise; they purge out the
remaining leaven of selfishness; God's Spirit descends in richer influences upon
them; the calm of a celestial power fills their souls; they find that they have
been cast down in order that they may be lifted up, and that, instead of ruin,
which the world's wise men and their own fears had foretold, they are now
nearing the goal, and that it is triumph that awaits them. So was it with
Protestantism in France at this hour. The disaster which had overtaken it, and
in which its enemies saw only ruin, was but the prelude to its vindicating for
itself a higher position than it had ever before attained in that
nation.
The heads of the Protestant cause and the captains of the army
gathered round Admiral de Coligny, after the battle, but with looks so
crestfallen, and speaking in tones so desponding, that it was plain they had
given up all as lost. Not so Coligny. The last to unsheathe the sword, he would
be the last to return it to its scabbard, nor would he abandon the enterprise so
long as a single friend was by his side.
"No," said Coligny, in answer to
the desponding utterances of the men around him, "all is not lost; nothing is
lost; we have lost a battle, it is true; but the burial trenches of Montcontour
do not contain all the Huguenots; the Protestants of France have not been
conquered; those provinces of the kingdom in which Protestantism has taken the
deepest root, and which have but slightly felt the recent reverses, will give us
another army." The Protestants of Germany and England, he reminded them, were
their friends, and would send them succors; they must not confine their eye to
one point, nor permit their imagination to dwell on one defeat; they must
embrace in their survey the whole field; they must not count the soldiers of
Protestantism, they must weigh its moral and spiritual forces, and, when they
had done so, they would see that there was no cause to despair of its triumph.
By these magnanimous words Coligny raised the spirit of his friends, and they
resolved to continue the struggle.[1]
The result
justified the wisdom as well as the courage of the admiral. He made his appeal
to the provinces beyond the Loire, where the friends of Protestantism were the
most numerous. Kindling into enthusiasm at his call, there flocked to his
standard from the mountains of Bearn, from the cities of Dauphine, and the
region of the Cevennes, young and stalwart warriors, who promised to defend
their faith and liberties till death.[2] When the spring opened the
brave patriot-chief had another army, more numerous and better disciplined than
the one he had lost, ready to take the field and strike another blow. The fatal
fields of Jarnac and Montcontour were not to be the grave of French
Huguenotism.
When the winter had passed, and after some encounters with
the enemy, which tested the spirit of his army, Coligny judged it best to march
direct on Paris, and make terms under the walls of the capital. The bold project
was put in instant execution. The tidings that Coligny was approaching struck
the Government with consternation. The court, surrendering itself to the
pleasant dream that Protestantism lay buried in the gory mounds of its recent
battle-fields, had given itself up to those pleasures which ruin, body and soul,
those who indulge in them. The court was at its wits' end. Not only was the
redoubtable Huguenot chief again in the field, he was on his road to Paris, to
demand a reckoning for so many Pacifications broken, and so much blood spilt.
The measure which the court adopted to ward off the impending danger was a weak
one. They sent the Duke of Anjou—the third son of Catherine de Medici, the same
who afterwards ascended the throne under the title of Henry III—with an army of
gallants, to stop Coligny's march. The stern faces and heavy blows of the
mountain Huguenots drove back the emasculated recruits of Anjou. Coligny
continued his advance. A few days more and Paris, surrounded by his Huguenots,
would be enduring siege. A council of war was immediately held, attended by the
King, the Queen-mother, the Duke of Anjou, and the Cardinal of Lorraine. It was
resolved, says Davila, to have recourse to the old shift, that namely of
offering peace to the Huguenots.
The peace was granted, Davila tells
us—and he well knew the secrets of the court—in the hope "that the foreign
troops would be sent out of France, and that artifice and opportunity would
enable them to take off the heads of the Protestant faction, when the common
people would yield, and return to their obedience."[3] This ending of the matter,
by "artifice and opportunity," the historian goes on to remark, had been long
kept in view. Catherine de Medici now came to terms with Coligny, the man whom a
little time ago she had proclaimed an outlaw, setting a price upon his head; and
on the 8th of August, 1570, the Peace of St. Germain-en-Laye was
signed.
The terms of that treaty were unexpectedly favorable. Its general
basis was an amnesty for all past offenses; the right of the Huguenots to reside
in any part of France without being called in question for their religious
opinions; liberty of worship in the suburbs of two towns in each province;
admissibility of the Protestants to most of the offices of state, and the
restoration of all confiscated property. As a guarantee for the faithful
execution of the treaty, four cities were put into the hands of the
Protestants—La Rochelle, La Charite, Cognac, and Montauban. The torn country had
now a little rest; sweet it was for the Huguenots to exchange camps and
battle-fields for their peaceful homes. There was one drawback, however, the
remembrance of the many Pacifications that had been made only to be broken. This
was the third in the space of seven years. Meanwhile the daughter of the Medici
held out the olive-branch: but so little was she trusted that none of the
Huguenot chiefs presented themselves at court, nor did they even deem themselves
secure in their own castles; they retired in a body within the strongly
fortified city of La Rochelle.
Davila admits that the Protestants had
good grounds for these suspicions. The peace was the gift of the Trojans; and
from this time the shadow of the St. Bartholomew massacre begins to darken the
historian's page. "The peace having been concluded and established," says he,
"the stratagem formed in the minds of the king and queen for bringing the
principal Huguenots into the net began now to be carried out, and they sought to
compass by policy that which had so often been attempted by war, but which had
been always found fruitless and dangerous."[4] Davila favors us with a
glimpse of that policy, which it was hoped would gain what force had not
effected. The king "being now come to the age of two-and-twenty, of a resolute
nature, a spirit full of resentment, and above all, an absolute dissembler,"
scrupulously observed the treaty, and punished the Roman Catholic mobs for their
infractions of it in various places, and strove by "other artifices to lull to
sleep the suspicions of Coligny and his friends, to gain their entire
confidence, and so draw them to court." Maimbourg's testimony, which on this
head may be entirely trusted, is to the same effect. "But not to dissemble,"
says he, "as the queen did in this treaty, there is every appearance that a
peace of this kind was not made in good faith on the part of this princess, who
had her concealed design, and who granted such things to the Huguenots only to
disarm them, and afterwards to surprise those upon whom she wished to be
revenged, and especially the admiral, at the first favorable opportunity she
should have for it."[5]
When from the
stormy era at which we are now arrived—the eighth year of the civil wars—we look
back to the calm day-break under Lefevre, we are touched with a tender sorrow,
and recall, with the din of battle in our ears, the psalms that the reapers, as
they rested at mid-day, were wont to sing on the harvest-fields of Meaux. The
light of that day-break continued to wax till the morning had passed into ahnost
noon-day. But with the war came an arrest of this most auspicious progress.
Piety decayed on the battle-field, and the evangelization began to retrograde.
"Before the wars" says Felice, "proselytism was conducted on a large scale, and
embraced whole cities and provinces; peace and freedom allowed of this;
afterwards proselytes were few in number, and obtained with difficulty, now many
corpses were there heaped up as barriers between the two communions; how many
bitter enemies, and cruel remembrances, watched around the two camps to forbid
approach."[6] Still, if the root of that
once noble vine which stretched its branches on the one side to the Pyrenees,
and on the other to the English sea, is still in the soil of France, we owe it
to the heroes of the Huguenot wars. Different circumstances demand the display
of different graces. Psalms and hymns became the first Protestants of France.
Strong cries to God, trust in his arm, and strivings unto blood formed the
worship of the Huguenots. They were martyrs, though they died in armor. The
former is the lovelier picture, the latter is the grander. In truth, times like
those in which Coligny lived, act on the spiritual constitution much as a stern
climate acts on the physical. The sickly are dwarfed by it, the robust are
nourished into yet greater robustness. The oak that battles with the winds,
shows its boughs sorely gnarled, and its trunk sheathed in a bark of iron, but
within there flows a current of living sap, which enables it to live and ripen
its acorns through a thousand years. And so of the Christian who is exposed to
such tempests as those amid which Coligny moved; what his piety loses in point
of external grace, it acquires In respect of an internal strength, which is put
forth in acts of faith in God, and in deeds of sacrifice and service to
man.
Meanwhile the great winds were holden that they might not blow on
the vine of France, and during these two tranquil years a synod of the Reformed
Church was held at La Rochelle (1571). This synod marks the acme of
Protestantism in France. To borrow a figure from classic times, the doors of the
temple of Janus were closed; war's banner was furled; and the Huguenots went up
to their strong city of La Rochelle, and held their great convocation within its
gates. The synod was presided over by Theodore Beza. Calvin was dead, having
gone to the grave just as these troubles were darkening over France; but his
place was not unworthily filled by his great successor, the learned and eloquent
Beza. The synod was attended by the Queen of Navarre, Jeanne d'Albret, who was
accompanied by her son, the Prince of Bearn, the future Henry IV. There were
present also Henry, the young Prince of Conde; Gaspard de Coligny, Admiral of
France; the Count of Nassau; the flower of the French noblesse; the pastors, now
a numerous body; the captains of the army, a great many lay deputies, together
with a miscellaneous assemblage composed of the city burghers, the vine-dressers
of the plains, and the herdsmen of the hills. They sat day by day to receive
accounts of the state of Protestantism in the various provinces, and to concert
measures for the building up of the Reformed Church in their native
land.
We have already related the meeting of the first synod of the
French Protestant Church at Paris, in 1559. At that synod were laid the
foundations of the Church's polity; her confession of faith was compiled, and
her whole order and organization were settled. Five national synods had
assembled in the interval, and this at La Rochelle was the seventh; but neither
at this, nor at the five that preceded it, had any alteration of the least
importance been made in the creed or in the constitution of the French Church,
as agreed on at its first national synod, in 1559. This assembly, so illustrious
for the learning, the rank, and the numbers of its members, set the seal of its
approval on what the eleven pastors had done at Paris twelve years before. There
is no synod like this at La Rochelle, before or since, in the history of the
French Protestant Church. It was a breathing-time, short, but beyond measure
refreshing. "The French Church," says one, "now sat under the apple-tree; God
spread a table for her in the presence of her enemies."
CHAPTER
13 Back to
Top
THE PROMOTERS OF THE ST. BARTHOLOMEW
MASSACRE.
Theocracy and the Punishment of Heresy—The League—Philip
II— Urges Massacre—Position of Catherine de Medici—Hopelessness of Subduing the
Huguenots on the Battle-field — Pius V — His Austerities— Fanaticism—Becomes
Chief Inquisitor—His Habits as Pope—His Death —Correspondence of Pius V with
Charles IX and Catherine de Medici— Massacre distinctly Outlined by the
Pope.
The ever-memorable Synod of La Rochelle has closed
its sittings; the noon of Protestantism in France has been reached; and now we
have sadly to chronicle the premature decline of a day that promised to be long
and brilliant. Already we are within the dark shadow of a great coming
catastrophe.
The springs and causes of the St. Bartholomew Massacre are
to be sought for outside the limits of the country in which it was enacted. A
great conjunction of principles and politics conspired to give birth to a
tragedy which yields in horror to no crime that ever startled the world. The
first and primary root of this, as of all similar massacres in Christendom, is
the divine vicegerency of the Pope. So long as Christendom is held to be a
theocracy, rebellion against the law of its divine monarch, in other words
heresy, is and must be justly punishable with death.
But, over and above,
action in this special direction had been plotted and solemnly enjoined by the
Council of Trent. "Roman Catholic Europe," says Gaberel, "was to erase Reformed
Europe, and proclaim the two principles —the sovereign authority of the kings in
political affairs, and the infallibility of the Pope in religious questions. The
right of resisting the temporal, and the right of inquiring into the spiritual,
were held to be detestable crimes, which the League wished to banish from the
world."[1] At the head of the League
was Philip II; and the sanguinary ferocity of the King of Spain made the vast
zeal of the French court look but as lukewarmness. A massacre was then in
progress in the Low Countries, which took doubtless the form of war, but yielded
its heaps of corpses almost daily, and which thrills us less than the St.
Bartholomew only because, instead of consummating its horrors in one terrible
week, it extended them over many dismal years. Philip never ceased to urge on
Catherine de Medici and Charles IX to do in France as he was doing in Flanders.
These reiterated exhortations were doubtless the more effectual inasmuch as they
entirely coincided with what Catherine doubted her truest policy. The
hopelessness of overcoming the Huguenots in the field was now becoming very
apparent. Three campaigns had been fought, and the position of the Protestants
was stronger than at the beginning of the war. No sooner was one Huguenot army
defeated and dispersed, than another and a more powerful took the field. The
Prince of Conde had fallen, but his place was filled by a chief of equal rank.
The court of France had indulged the hope that if the leaders were cut off the
people would grow disheartened, and the contest would languish and die out; but
the rapidity with which vacancies were supplied, and disasters repaired, at last
convinced the King and Queen-mother that these hopes were futile. They must lay
their account with a Huguenot ascendency at an early day, unless they followed
the counsels of Philip of Spain, and by a sudden and sweeping stroke cut off the
whole Huguenot race. But the time and the way, as Catherine told Philip, must be
left to herself.
At this great crisis of the Papal affairs—for if
Huguenotism had triumphed in France it would have carried its victorious arms
over Spain and Italy—a higher authority than even Philip of Spain came forward
to counsel the steps to be taken—nay, not to counsel only, but to teach
authoritatively what was Duty in the matter, and enjoin the performance of that
duty under the highest sanctions, This brings the reigning Pontiff upon the
scene, and we shall try and make clear Pope Pius V's connection with the
terrible event we are approaching. It will assist us in understanding this part
of history, if we permit his biographers to bring before us the man who bore no
inconspicuous part in it.
The St. Bartholomew Massacre was plotted under
the Pontificate of Pius V, and enacted under that of his immediate successor,
Gregory XIII. Michael Ghislisri (Pius V) was born in the little town of Bosco,
on the plain of Piedmont, in the year 1504. His parents were in humble station.
"The genius of the son," says his biographer Gabutius, "fitted him for higher
things than the manual labors that occupied his parents. The spirit of God
excited him to that mode of life by which he might the more signally serve God
and, escaping the snares of earth, attain the heavenly felicity."[2] He was marked from his
earliest years by an austere piety.
Making St. Dominic, the founder of
the Inquisition, his model, and having, it would seem, a natural predilection
for this terrible business, he entered a Dominican convent at the age of
fourteen. He obeyed, body and soul, the laws of his order. The poverty which his
vow enjoined he rigidly practiced. Of the alms which he collected he did not
retain so much as would buy him a cloak for the winter; and he fortified himself
against the heats of summer by practizing a severe abstinence. He labored to
make his fellow-monks renounce their slothful habits, their luxurious meals, and
their gay attire, and follow the same severe, mortified, and pious life with
himself. If not very successful with them, he continued nevertheless to pursue
these austerities himself, and soon his fame spread far and near. He was
appointed confessor to the Governor of Milan, and this necessitated an
occasional journey of twenty miles, which was always performed on foot, with his
wallet on his back.[3] On the road he seldom
spoke to his companions, "employing his time," says his biographer, "in reciting
prayers or meditating on holy things."[4] His devotion to the Roman
See, and the zeal with which he combated Protestantism, recommended him to his
superiors, and his advancement was rapid. Of several offices which were now in
his choice, he gave his decided preference to that of inquisitor, "from his
ardent desire," his biographer tells us, "to exterminate heretics, and extend
the Roman Catholic faith." The district including Como and the neighboring towns
was committed to his care, and he discharged the duties of this fearful office
with such indefatigable, and indeed ferocious zeal, as often to imperil his own
life. The Duchy of Milan was then being inoculated with "the pernicious and
diabolical doctrines," as Gabutius styles them, of Protestantism; and Michael
Ghislieri was pitched upon as the only man fit to cope with the evil. Day and
night he perambulated his diocese on the quest for heretics. This was judged too
narrow a sphere for an activity so prodigious, and Paul IV, himself one of the
greatest of persecutors, nominated Ghislieri to the office of supreme
inquisitor. This brought him to Rome; and here, at last, he found a sphere
commensurate with the greatness of his zeal. He continued to serve under Pius
IV, adding to the congenial office of inquisitor, the scarlet of the
cardinalate.[5] On the death of Pius IV,
Ghislieri was elevated to the Popedom, his chief recommendation in the eyes of
his supporters, including Cardinal Borromeo and Philip II, being his
inextinguishable zeal for the suppression of heresy. Rome was then in the thick
of her battle, and Ghislieri was selected as the fittest man to preside over and
infuse new rigor into that institution on which she mainly relied for victory.
The future life of Pius V justified his elevation. His daily fare was as humble,
his clothing as mean, his fasts as frequent, and his household arrangements as
economical, now that he wore the tiara, as when he was a simple monk. He rose
with the first light, he kneeled long in prayer, and often would he mingle his
tears with his supplications; he abounded in alms, he forgot injuries, he was
kind to his domestics; he might often be seen with naked feet, and head
uncovered, his white beard sweeping his breast, walking in procession, and
receiving the reverence of the populace as one of the holiest Popes that had
ever trodden the streets of Rome.[6] But one formidable quality
did Pius V conjoin with all this—even an intense, unmitigated detestation of
Protestantism, and a fixed, inexorable determination to root it out. In his
rapid ascent from post to post, he saw the hand of God conducting him to the
summit, that there, wielding all the arms, temporal and spiritual, of
Christendom, he might discharge, in one terrible stroke, the concentrated
vengeance of the Popedom on the hydra of heresy. Every hour of every day he
occupied in the execution of what he believed to be his predestined work. He
sent money and soldiers to France to carry on the war against the Huguenots; he
addressed continual letters to the kings and bishops of the Popish world,
inciting them to yet greater zeal in the slaughter of heretics; ever and anon
the cry "To massacre!" was sounded forth from the Vatican; but not a doubt had
Pius V that this butchery was well-pleasing to God, and that he himself was the
appointed instrument for emptying the vials of wrath upon a system which he
regarded as accursed, and believed to be doomed to destruction.
Such was
the man who at this era filled the Papal throne. But let us permit Pius V
himself to speak. In 1569, the Pope, despairing of overcoming the French
heretics in open war, darkly suggests a way more secret and more sure. "Our
zeal," says he, in his letter to the Cardinal of Lorraine, "gives us the right
of earnestly exhorting and exciting you to use all your influence for procuring
a definite and serious adoption of the measure most proper for bringing about
the destruction of the implacable enemies of God and the king."[7] After the victory of
Jarnac the French Government acknowledged the help the Pope had given them in
winning it, by sending to Rome some Huguenot standards taken on the field, to be
displayed in the Lateran. Pius V replied in a strain of exultation, and labored
to stimulate the court to immediate and remorseless massacre. "The more the Lord
has treated you and me with kindness," so wrote he to Charles IX, "the more you
ought to take advantage of the opportunity this victory offers to you, for
pursuing and destroying all the enemies that still remain; for tearing up
entirely all the roots, and even the smallest fibers of the roots, of so
terrible and continued an evil. For unless they are radically extirpated, they
will be found to shoot up again; and, as it has already happened several times,
the mischief will reappear when your majesty least expects it. You will bring
this about if no consideration for persons, or worldly things, induces you to
spare the enemies of God — who have never spared yourself. For you will not
succeed in turning away the wrath of God, except by avenging him rigorously on
the wretches who have offended him, by inflicting on them the punishment they
have deserved."[8]
These advices,
coming from such a quarter were commands, and they could take no practical shape
but that of massacre; and to make it unmistakable that this was the shape the
Pope meant his counsels to take, he proceeds to cite a case in point from Old
Testament history.
"Let your majesty take for example, and never lose
sight of, what happened to Saul, King of Israel. He had received the orders of
God, by the mouth of the prophet Samuel, to fight and to exterminate the infidel
Amalekites, in such a way that he should not spare one in any case, or under any
pretext. But he did not obey the will and the voice of God... therefore he was
deprived of his throne and his life." If for Saul we read Charles IX, and for
the prophet Samuel we substitute Pius V, as the writer clearly intended should
be done, what is this but a command addressed to the King of France, on peril of
his throne, to massacre all the Huguenots in his realm, without sparing even
one? "By this example," continues the Pope, "God has wished to teach all kings
that to neglect the vengeance of outrages done to him is to provoke his wrath
and indignation against themselves."
To Catherine de Medici, Pius V
writes in still plainer terms, as if he knew her wolfish nature, as well as her
power over her son, promising her the assistance of Heaven if she would pursue
the enemies of the Roman Catholic religion "till they are all massacred,[9] for it is only by the
entire extermination of heretics [10] that the Roman Catholic
worship can be restored."[11]
There follow
letters to the Duke of Anjou, and the Cardinal of Lorraine, and another to the
king, all breathing the same sanguinary spirit, and en-joining the same
inexorability towards the vanquished heretics.[12]
At Bayonne, in
1565, Catherine met the Duke of Alva, as we have already seen, to consult as to
the means of ridding France of heretics. "They agreed at last," says the
contemporary historian Adriani, "in the opinion of the Catholic king, that this
great blessing could not have accomplishment save by the death of all the chiefs
of the Huguenots, and by a new edition, as the saying was, of the Sicilian
Vespers."[13] "They decided," says
Guizot, "that the deed should be done at Moulins, in Bourbonnes, whither the
king was to return. The execution of it was afterwards deferred to the date of
the St. Bartholomew, in 1572, at Paris, because of certain suspicions which had
been manifested by the Huguenots, and because it was considered easier and more
certain to get them all together at Paris than at Moulins." This is confirmed by
Tavannes, who says: "The Kings of France and of Spain, at Bayonne, assisted by
the Duke of Alva, resolved on the destruction of the heretics in France and
Flanders."[14] La Noue in his Memoires
bears witness to the "resolution taken at Bayonne with the Duke of Alva, to
extirpate the Huguenots of France and the beggars of Flanders, which was brought
to light by intercepted letters coming from Rome to Spain."[15]
"Catherine de
Medici," says Guizot, "charged Cardinal Santa Croce to assure Pope Pius V 'that
she and her son had nothing more at heart than to get the admiral and all his
confidants together some day, and make a massacre [un macello] of them; but the
matter,' she said, 'was so difficult, that there was no possibility of promising
to do it at one time more than at another.'" "De Thou," adds the historian,
"regards all these facts as certain, and after having added some details, he
sums them all up in the words, 'This is what passed at Bayonne in 1565.'"[16]
We have it, thus,
under the Pope's own hand, that he enjoined on Charles IX and Catherine de
Medici the entire extermination of the French Protestants, on the battle-field
if possible; if not, by means more secret and more sure; we have it on
contemporary testimony, Popish and Protestant, that this was what was agreed on
between Catherine and Alva at Bayonne; and we also find the Queen-mother,
through Santa Croce, promising to the Pope, for herself and for her son, to make
a massacre of the Huguenots, although, for obvious reasons, she refuses to bind
herself to a day. From this time that policy was entered on which was designed
to lead up to the grand denouement so unmistakably shadowed forth in the letters
of the Pope, and in the agreement between Alva and Catherine.
CHAPTER
14 Back to
Top
NEGOTIATIONS OF THE COURT WITH THE
HUGUENOTS.
Dissimulation on a Grand Scale — Proposed Expedition to
Flanders— The Prince of Orange to be Assisted—The Proposal brings Coligny to
Court—The King's Reception of him — Proposed Marriage of the King's Sister with
the King of Navarre—Jeanne d'Albret comes to Court — Her Sudden Death—Picture of
the French Court—Interview between Charles IX and the Papal Legate—The King's
Pledge—His Doublings.
Great difficulties, however, lay in the path of the
policy arranged between the Queen-mother and Alva. The first was the deep
mistrust which the Protestants cherished of Catherine and Charles IX. Not one
honest peace had the French court ever made with them. Far more Protestants had
perished by massacre during the currency of the various Pacifications, than had
fallen by the sword in times of war. Accordingly, when the Peace of St.
Germain-en-Laye was made, the Huguenot chiefs, instead of repairing to court,
retired within the strongly fortified town of La Rochelle. They must be drawn
out; their suspicions must be lulled to sleep, and their chief men assembled in
Paris. This was the point to be first effected, and nothing but patience and
consummate craft could achieve it.
No ordinary illusion could blind men
who had been so often and so deeply duped already. This the French court saw. A
new and grander style of stratagem than any heretofore employed was adopted.
Professions, promises, and dignities were profusely lavished upon the Huguenots,
but, over and above, great schemes of national policy were projected, reaching
into the future, embracing the aggrandisement of France, coinciding with the
views of the Huguenot chiefs, and requiring their cooperation in order to their
successful execution. This gave an air of sincerity to the professions of the
court which nothing else could have done, for it was thought impossible that men
who were cogitating plans so enlightened, were merely contriving a cunning
scheme, and weaving a web of guile. But Catherine was aware that she was too
well known for anything less astute to deceive the Huguenot leaders. The
proposal of the court was that the young King of Navarre should marry Margaret
de Valois, the sister of Charles IX, and that an armed intervention should be
made in the Low Countries in aid of the Prince of Orange against Philip of
Spain, and that Coligny should be placed at the head of the expedition. These
were not new ideas. The marriage had been talked of in Henry II's time, while
Margaret and Henry of Navarre were yet children; and as regards the intervention
in behalf of the Protestants of the Low Countries, that was a project which the
Liberal party, which had been forming at the Louvre, headed by Chancellor
l'Hopital, had thrown out. They were revived by Catherine as by far her best
stratagem: "the King and Queen-mother," says Davila, "imparting their private
thoughts only to the Duke of Anjou, the Cardinal of Lorraine, the Duke of Guise,
and Alberto Gondi, Count of Retz."[1]
Charles IX
instantly dispatched Marshal de Biron to La Rochelle, to negotiate the marriage
of his sister with the Prince of Bearn, and to induce his mother, the Queen of
Navarre, to repair to court, that the matter might be concluded. The king sent
at the same time the Marshal de Cosse to La Rochelle, to broach the project of
the Flanders expedition to the Admiral de Coligny, "but in reality," says Sully,
"to observe the proceedings of the Calvinists, to sound their thoughts, and to
beget in them that confidence which was absolutely necessary for his own
designs."[2] After the repeated
violations of treaties, Pacifications, and oaths on the part of Catherine and
her son, it was no easy matter to overcome the deeply-rooted suspicions of men
who had so often smarted from the perfidy of the king and his mother. But
Catherine and Charles dissembled on this occasion with an adroitness which even
they had never shown before. Admiral de Coligny was the first to be won. He was
proverbial for his wariness, but, as sometimes happens, he was now conquered on
the point where he was strongest. Setting out from La Rochelle, in despite of
the tears and entreaties of his wife, he repaired to Blois (September, 1571),
where the court was then residing. On entering the presence of the king, Coligny
went on his knee, but Charles raised and embraced him, calling him his father.
The return of the warrior to court put him into a transport of joy. "I hold you
now," exclaimed the king; "yes, I hold you, and you shall not leave me again;
this is the happiest day of my life." "It is remarkable," says the Popish
historian Davila, after relating this, "that a king so young should know so
perfectly how to dissemble."[3] The Queen-mother, the
Dukes of Anjou and Alencon, and all the chief nobles of the court, testified the
same joy at the admiral's return. The king restored him to his pensions and
dignities, admitted him of his council, and on each succeeding visit to the
Louvre, loaded him with new and more condescending caresses and
flatteries.
Charles IX was at this time often closeted with the admiral.
The topic discussed was the expedition to Flanders in aid of William of Orange
in his war with Spain. The king listened with great seeming respect to the
admiral, and this deference to his sentiments and views, in a matter that lay so
near his heart, inspired Coligny doubtless with the confidence he now began to
feel in Charles, and the hopes he cherished that the king was beginning to see
that there was something nobler for himself than the profligacies in which his
mother, for her own vile ends, had reared him, and nobler for France than to be
dragged, for the Pope's pleasure, at the chariot-wheel of Spain. The admiral
would thus be able to render signal service to Protestantism in all the
countries of Europe, as well as rescue France from the gulf into which it was
fast descending; and this hope made him deaf to the warnings, which every day he
was receiving from friends, that a great treachery was meditated. And when these
warnings were reiterated, louder and plainer, they only drew forth from Coligny,
who longed for peace as they only long for it who have often gazed upon the
horrors of the stricken field, protestations that rather would he risk mas-sacre
— rather would he be dragged as a corpse through the streets of Paris, than
rekindle the flames of civil war, and forego the hope of detaching his country
from the Spanish alliance.
The admiral, having been completely gained
over, used his influence to win Jeanne d'Albret to a like confidence. Ever as
the marriage of her son to the daughter of Catherine de Medici was spoken of, a
vague but dreadfid foreboding oppressed her. She knew how brilliant was the
match, and what important consequences might flow from it.
It might lead
her son up the steps of the throne of France, and that would be tantamount to
the establishment of Protestantism in that great kingdom; nevertheless she could
not conquer her instinctive recoil from the union. It was a dreadful family to
marry into, and she trembled for the principles and the morals of her son.
Perefixe, afterwards Archbishop of Paris, who cannot be suspected of having made
the picture darker than the reality, paints the condition of the French court in
one brief but terrible sentence. He says that "impiety, atheism, necromancy,
most horrible pollutions, black cowardice, perfidy, poisonings, and
assassinations reig-ned there in a supreme degree." But Catherine de Medici
urged and re-urged her invitations. "Satisfy," she wrote to the Queen of
Navarre, "the extreme desire we have to see you in this company; you will be
loved and honored therein as accords with reason, and what you are." At last
Jeanne d'Albret gave her consent to the marriage, and visited the court at Blois
in March, l572, to arrange preliminaries. The Queen-mother but trifled with and
insulted her after she did come. Jeanne wrote to her son that she could make no
progress in the affair which had brought her to court. She returned to Paris in
the beginning of June. She had not been more than ten days at court, when she
sickened and died. The general belief, in which Davila and other Popish
historians concur, was that she died of subtle poison, which acted on the brain
alone, and which exuded from certain gloves that had been presented to her. This
suspicion was but natural, nevertheless we are inclined to think that a more
likely cause was the anxiety and agitation of mind she was then enduring, and
which brought on a fever, of which she died on the fifth day.[4] She was but little cared
for during her illness, and after death her corpse was treated with studied
neglect.
"This," says Davila, "was the first thunderbolt of the great
tempest." The king was dissembling so perfectly that he awakened the suspicions
of the Papists. Profound secrecy was absolutely necessary to the success of the
plot, and accordingly it was disclosed, in its details, to only two or three
whose help was essential to its execution. Meanwhile the admirable acting of the
king stumbled the Romanists: it was so like sincerity that they thought it not
impossible that it might turn out to be so, and that themselves and not the
Huguenots would be the victims of the drama now in progress. The courtiers
murmured, the priests were indignant, the populace expected every day to see
Charles go over to the "religion;" and neither the Pope nor the King of Spain
could comprehend why the king was so bent on marrying his sister to the son of
the Protestant Queen of Navarre. That, said the direct and terrible Pius V, was
to unite light and darkness, and to join in concord God and Belial. Meanwhile,
Charles IX, who could not drop the mask but at the risk of spoiling all,
contemplated with a certain pride the perfection of his own dissimulation. "Ah,
well," said he one evening to his mother, "do I not play my role well?" "Yes,
very well, my son," replied Catherine, "but it is nothing if it is not
maintained to the end."[5] And Charles did maintain
it to the end, and even after the St. Bartholomew, for he was fond of saying
with a laugh, "My big sister Margot caught all these Huguenot rebels in the
bird-catching style. What has grieved me most is being obliged to dissimulate so
long."[6]
The marriage, we
have said, was the hinge on which the whole plot turned; for ordinary artifices
would never have enabled Catherine and Charles to deceive on a great scale. But
Pius V either did not quite comprehend this, or he disapproved of it as a means
of bringing about the massacre, for he sent his legate, Cardinal Alexandrino, to
Paris to protest against the union.
At his interview with the legate,
Charles IX pleaded the distractions of his kingdom, and the exhaustion of his
treasury, as his reasons for resorting to the marriage rather than continuing
the civil wars. But these excuses the legate would not accept as sufficient.
"You are in the right," replied Clmrles. "And if I had any other means of taking
vengeance on my enemies, I would never consent to this marriage; but I can find
no other way." And he concluded by bidding the legate assure the Pope that all
he was doing was with the best intention, and for the aggrandizement of the
Roman Catholic religion; and taking a valuable ring from his finger he offered
it to Alexandrino as "a pledge of his indefectible obedience to the 'Holy See,'
and his resolution to implement whatever he had promised to do in opposition to
the impiety of these wicked men."[7] The legate declined the
ring on the pretext that the word of so great a king was enough. Nevertheless,
after the massacre, Charles IX sent the ring to Rome, with the words ne pietas
possit mea sanguine salvi engraven upon it. Clement VIII, who was auditor and
companion to Alexandrino on his mission to France, afterwards told Cardinal
d'Ossat that when the news of the St. Bartholomew Massacre reached Rome, the
cardinal exclaimed in transport of joy, "Praise be to God, the King of France
has kept his word with me!"[8]
Action was at the
same time taken in the matter of supporting the Protestant war in the Low
Countries, for the dissimulation had to be maintained in both its branches. A
body of Huguenot soldiers, in which a few Papists were mingled, was raised,
placed under Senlis, a comrade of Coligny's in faith and arms, and dispatched to
the aid of William of Orange. Senlis had an interview with Charles IX before
setting out, and received from him money and encouragement. But the same court
that sent this regiment to fight against the Duke of Alva, sent secret
information to the duke which enabled him to surprise the Protestant soldiers on
the march, and cut them in pieces. "I have in my hands," wrote the Duke of Alva
to his master, Philip II, "a letter from the King of France, which would strike
you dumb if you were to see it; for the moment it is expedient to say nothing
about it."[9] Another piece of equal
dissimulation did Charles IX practice about this time. The little Party at the
French court which was opposed to the Spanish alliance, and in the same measure
favored the success of William of Orange in Flanders, was headed by the
Chancellor l'Hopital. At the very time that Charles IX was making Coligny
believe that he had become a convert to that plan, Chancellor l'Hopital was
deprived of the seals, and banished from court.[10]
The inconsistencies
and doublings of Charles IX. are just enough to give some little color to a
theory which has found some advocates — namely, that the St. Bartholomew
Massacre was unpremeditated, and that it was a sudden and violent resolve on the
part of Catherine de Medici and the Guises, to prevent the king yielding to the
influence of Admiral de Coligny, and putting himself at the head of a Huguenot
crusade in favor of Protestantism.[11] Verily there never was
much danger of this; but though the hesitations of Charles impart some
feasibility to the theory, they give it no solid weight whatever. All the
historians, Popish and Protestant~ who lived nearest the time, and who took
every care to inform themselves, with one consent declare that the massacre was
premeditated and arranged. It had its origlnation in the courts of Paris,
Madrid, and the Vatican. A chain of well-established facts conducts us to this
conclusion. Most of these have already come before us, but some of them yet
remain to be told. But even irrespective of these facts, looking at the age, at
Charles IX., and at the state of Christendom, can any man believe that the King
of France should have seriously contemplated, as he must have done if his
professions to the Huguenots were sincere, not only proclaiming toleration in
France, but becoming the head of an armed European confederation in behalf of
Protestantism? This is wholly inconceivable.
CHAPTER
15 Back to
Top
THE MARRIAGE, AND PREPARATIONS FOR
THE MASSACRE.
Auguries—The King of Navarre and his Companions arrive
in Paris— The Marriage—The Rejoicings—Character of Pius V—The Admiral Shot— The
King and Court Visit him—Behavior of the King—Davila on the Plot —The City-gates
Closed—Troops introduced into Paris—The Huguenot Quarter Surrounded—Charles IX
Hesitates—Interview between him and his Mother—Shall Navarre and Conde be
Massacred?
The Queen of Navarre, the magnanimous Jeanne
d'Albret, was dead; moreover, news had reached Paris that the Protestant troop
which had set out to assist the Prince of Orange had been overpowered and slain
on the road; and further, the great advocate of toleration, L'Hopital, dismissed
from office, had been banished to his country-seat of Vignay. All was going
amiss, save the promises and protests of the King and the Queen-mother, and
these were growing louder and more emphatic every day.
Some of the
Huguenots, alarmed by these suspicious occurrences, were escaping from the city,
others were giving expression to their fears in prognostications of evil. The
Baron de Rosny, father of the celebrated Duke of Sully, said that "if the
marriage took place at Paris the wedding farourn would be crimson."[1] In the midst of all this
the preparations for the marriage went rapidly on.
The King of Navarre
alTived in Paris in deep mourning, "attended by eight hundred gentlemen all
likewise in mourning." "But," says Margaret de Valois herself, "the nuptials
took place a few days afterwards, with such triumph and magnificence as none
others of my quality; the King of Navarre and his troop having changed their
mourning for very rich and fine clothes, and I being dressed royally, with crown
and corset of tufted ermine, all blazing with crown jewels, and the grand blue
mantle with a train four ells long, borne by three princesses, the people
choking one another down below to see us pass."[2] The marriage was
celebrated on the 18th of August by the Cardinal of Bourbon, in a pavilion
erected in front of the principal entrance of Notre Dame. When asked if she
accepted Henry of Navarre as her husband, Margaret, it is said, remained
silent;[3] whereupon the king, putting his hand upon her head,
bent it downward, which being interpreted as consent, the ceremony went on. When
it was over, the bride and her party entered Notre Dame, and heard mass;
meanwhile the bridegroom with Coligny and other friends amused themselves by
strolling through the aisles of the cathedral. Gazing up at the flags suspended
from the roof, the admiral remarked that one day soon these would be replaced by
others more appropriate; he referred, of course, to the Spanish standards to be
taken, as he hoped, in the approaching war. The four following days all Paris
was occupied with fetes, ballets, and other public rejoicings. It was during
these festivities that the final arrangements were made for striking the great
meditated blow.
Before this, however, one of the chief actors passed
away, and saw not the work completed which he had so largely helped to bring to
pass. On the 5th of May, 1572, Pope Pius V died. There was scarcely a stormier
Pontificate in the history of the Popes than that of the man who descended into
the tomb at the very moment when he most wished to live. From the day he
ascended the Papal throne till he breathed his last, neither Asia nor Europe had
rest. His Pontificate of seven years was spent in raising armaments, organizing
expeditions, giving orders for battles, and writing letters to sovereigns
inciting them to slay to the last man those whom he was pleased to account the
enemies of God and of himself. Now it was against the Turk that he hurled his
armed legionaries, and now it was against the Lutherans of Germany, the
Huguenots of France, and the Calvinists of England and Scotland that he
thundered in his character of Vicar of God. Well was it for Christendom that so
much of the military furor of Pius was discharged in all eastern direction. The
Turk became the conducting-rod that drew off the lightning of the Vatican and
helped to shield Europe. Pius' exit from the world was a dreadful one, and bore
a striking resemblance to the Moody malady of which the King of France expired
so soon there-after.[4] The Pontiff, however, bore
up wonderfully under his disease, which was as painful as it was
loathsome.
The death of the Pope opened a free path to the marriage which
we have just seen take place. The dispensation from Rome, which Pius V had
refused, his successor Gregory XIII conceded. Four days after the
ceremony—Friday, the 22nd of August—as Coligny was returning on foot from the
Louvre, occupied in reading a letter, he was fired at from the window of a house
in the Rue des Fosses, St. Germain. One of the three balls with which the
assassin had loaded his piece, to make sure of his victim, smashed the two
fore-fingers of his right hand, while another lodged in his left arm. The
admiral, raising his wounded hand, pointed to the house whence the shot had
come. It belonged to an old canon, who had been tutor to Henry, Duke of Guise;
but before it could be entered, the assassin had escaped on a horse from the
king's stables. which was waiting for him by the cloisters of the Church of
L'Auxerrois.[5] It was Maurevel who had
fired the shot, the same who was known as the king's assassin. He had posted
himself in one of the lower rooms of the house, and covering the iron bars of
the window with an old cloak, he waited three days for his victim.
The
king was playing tennis with the Duke of Guise and Coligny, the admiral's
son-in-law, when told of what had happened; Charles threw down his stick, and
exclaiming with all oath, "Am I never to have peace?" rushed to his apartment.
Guise slunk away, and Co1igny went straight to the admiral's house in the
adjacent Rue de Betizy.
Meanwhile Ambrose Pare had amputated the two
broken fingers of Coligny. Turning to Merlin, his chaplain, who stood by his
bedside, the admiral said, "Pray that God may grant me the gift of patience."
Seeing Merlin and other friends in tears, he said, "Why do you weep for me, my
friends? I reckon myself happy to have received these wounds in the cause of
God." Toward midday Marshals de Damville and de Cosse came to see him. To them
he protested, "Death affrights me not; but I should like very much to see the
king before I die." Damville went to inform his majesty.
About two of the
afternoon the King, the Queen-mother, the Duke of Anjou, and a number of the
gentlemen of the court entered the apartments of the wounded man. "My dear
father," exclaimed Charles, "the hurt is yours, the grief and the outrage mine;
but," added he, with his usual oaths, "I will take such vengeance that it shall
never be effaced from the memory of man." Coligny drew the king towards him, and
commenced an earnest conversation with him, in a low voice, urging the policy he
had so often recommended to Charles, that namely of assisting the Prince of
Orange, and so lowering Spain and elevating France in the comicils of
Europe.
Catherine de Medici, who did not hear what the admiral was saying
to the king, abruptly terminated the interview on pretense that to prolong it
would be to exhaust the strength and endanger the life of Coligny. The King and
Queen-mother now returned to the Louvre at so rapid a pace that they were
unobservant of the salutations of the populace, and even omitted the usual
devotions to the Virgin at the corners of the streets. On arriving at the palace
a secret consultation was held, after which the king was busied in giving
orders, and making up dispatches, with which couriers were sent off to the
provinces. When Charles and his suite had left Coligny's hotel, the admiral's
friends expressed their surprise and pleasure at the king's affability, and the
desire he showed to bring the criminal to justice. "But all these fine
appearances," says Brantome, "afterwards turned to ill, which amazed every one
very much how their majesties could perform so counterfeit a part, unless they
had previously resolved on this massacre."[6]
They began with the
admiral, says Davila, "from the apprehension they had of his fierceness, wisdom,
and power, fearing that were he alive he would concert some means for the safety
of himself and his confederates."[7] But as the Popish
historian goes on to explain, there was a deeper design in selecting Coligny as
the first victim. The Huguenots, they reasoned, would impute the murder of the
admiral to the Duke of Guise and his faction, and so would avenge it upon the
Guises. This attack upon the Guises would, in its turn, excite the fury of the
Roman Catholic mob against the Huguenots. The populace would rise en masse, and
slaughter the Protestants; and in this saturnalia of blood the enemies of
Charles and Catherine would be got rid of, and yet the hand of the court would
not be seen in the affair. The notorious Retz, the Florentine tuter of Charles,
is credited with the authorship of this diabolically ingenious plan. But the
matter had not gone as it was calculated it would. Coligny lived, and so the
general melee of assassination did not come off. The train had been fired, but
the mine did not explode.
The king had already given orders to close all
the gates of Paris, save two, which were left open to admit provisions. The
pretense was to cut off the escape of Maurevel. If this order could not arrest
the flight of the assassin, who was already far away on his fleet steed, it
effectually prevented the departure of the Huguenots. Troops were now introduced
into the city. The admiral had earnestly asked leave to retire to Chatilion, in
the quiet of which place he hoped sooner to recover from his wounds; but the
king would not hear of his leaving Paris. He feared the irritation of the wounds
that might arise from the journey; he would take care that neither Coligny nor
his friends should suffer molestation from the populace. Accordingly, bidding
the Protestants lodge all together in Coligny's quarter,[8] he appointed a regiment of
the Duke of Anjou to guard that part of Paris.[9] Thus closely was the net
drawn round the Huguenots. These soldiers were afterwards the most zealous and
cruel of their murderers.[10]
Friday night and
Saturday were spent in consultations on both sides. To a few of the Protestants
the designs of the court were now transparent, and they advised an instant and
forcible departure from Paris, carrying with them their wounded chief. Their
advice was over-ruled mainly through the over-confidence of Coligny in the
king's honor, and only a few of the Huguenots left the city. The deliberations
in the Louvre were more anxious still. The blow, it was considered, should be
struck immediately, else the Huguenots would escape, or they would betake them
to arms. But as the hour drew near the king appears to have wavered. Nature or
conscience momentarily awoke. Now that he stood on the precincts of the colossal
crime, he seems to have felt a shudder at the thought of going on; as well he
might, fierce, cruel, vindictive though he was. To wade through a sea of blood
so deep as that which was about to flow, might well appall even one who had been
trained, as Charles had been, to look on blood. It is possible even that the
nobleness of Coligny had not been without its effect upon him. The Queen-mother,
who had doubtless foreseen this moment of irresolution on the part of her son
when the crisis should arrive, was prepared for it. She instantly combated the
indecision of Charles with the arguments most fitted to influence his weak mind.
She told him that it was now too late to retreat; that the attempt on the
admiral's life had aroused the Protestants, that the plans of the court were
known to them, and that already messengers from the Huguenots were on their way
to Switzerland and Germany, for assistance, and that to hesitate was to be lost.
If he had a care for his throne and house he must act; and with a well-reigned
dread of the calamities she had so vividly depicted, she is said to have craved
leave for herself and her son, the Duke of Anjou, to retire to some place of
safety before the storm should burst. This was enough. The idea of being left
alone in the midst of all these dangers, without his mother's strong arm to lean
upon, was frightful to Charles. He forgot the greatness of the crime in the
imminency of his own danger. His vulpine and cowardly nature, incapable of a
brave course, was yet capable of a sudden and deadly spring. "He was seized with
an eager desire," says Maimbourg, "to execute the resolution already taken in
the secret council to massacre all the Huguenots."[11] "Then let Coligny be
killed," said Charles, with an oath, "and let not one Huguenot in all France be
left to reproach me with the deed."
One other point yet occasioned keen
debates in the council. Shall the King of Navarre and the Prince of Conde be
slain with the rest of the Huguenots? "The Duke of Guise," says Davila, "was
urgent for their death; but the King and the Queen-mother had a horror at
embruing their hands in royal blood;"[12] but it would seem that the
resolution of the council was for putting them to death. The Archbishop of
Paris, Perefixe, and Brantome inform us that "they were down on the red list" on
the ground of its being neccessary "to dig up the roots," but were afterwards
saved, "as by miracle." Queen Margaret, the newly-married wife of Navarre,
throwing herself on her knees before the king and earnestly begging the life of
her husband, "the King granted it to her with great difficulty, although she was
his good sister."[13] Meanwhile, to keep up the
delusion to the last, the king rode out on horseback in the afternoon, and the
queen had her court circle as usual.
CHAPTER
16 Back to
Top
THE MASSACRE OF ST.
BARTHOLOMEW.
Final Arrangements—The Tocsin—The First
Pistol-shot—Murder of Coligny—His Last Moments—Massacre throughout
Paris—Butchery at the Louvre—Sunrise, and what it Revealed—Charles IX Fires on
his Subjects—An Arquebus—The Massacres Extend throughout France— Numbers of the
Slain—Variously Computed—Charles IX Excusing Accuses himself—Reception of the
News in Flanders—in England — in Scotland—Arrival of the Escaped at
Geneva—Rejoicings at Rome—The Three Frescoes — The St. Bartholomew
Medal.
It was now eleven o'clock of Saturday night, and the
massacre was to begin at daybreak. Tavannes was sent to bid the Mayor of Paris
assemble the citizens, who for some days before had been provided with arms,
which they had stored in their houses. To exasperate them, and put them in a
mood for this unlimited butchery of their countrymen, in which at first they
were somewhat reluctant to engage, they were told that a horrible conspiracy had
been discovered, on the part of the Huguenots, to cut off the king and the royal
family, and destroy the monarchy and the Roman Catholic religion.[1] The signal for the
massacre was to be the tolling of the great bell of the Palace of
Justice.
As soon as the tocsin should have flung its ominous peal upon
the city, they were to hasten to draw chains across the streets, place pickets
in the open spaces, and sentinels on the bridges. Orders were also given that at
the first sound of the bell torches should be placed in all the windows, and
that the Roman Catholics, for distinction, should wear a white scarf on the left
arm, and affix a white cross on their hats.
"All was now arranged," says
Maimbourg, "for the carnage;" and they waited with impatience for the break of
day, when the tocsin was to sound. In the royal chamber sat Charles IX, the
Queen-mother, and the Duke of Anjou. Catherine's fears lest the king should
change his mind at the last minute would not permit her to leave him for one
moment. Few words, we may well believe, would pass between the royal personages.
The great event that impended could not but weigh heavily upon them. A deep
stillness reigned in the apartment; the hours wore wearily away; and the
Queen-mother feeling the suspense unbearable, or else afraid, as Maimbourg
suggests, that Charles, "greatly disturbed by the idea of the horrible butchew,
would revoke the order he had given for it," anticipated the signal by sending
one at two o'clock of the morning to ring the bell of St. Ger-main l'Auxerois,[2] which was nearer than that
of the Palace of Justice. Scarcely had its first peal startled the silence of
the night when a pistol shot was heard. The king started to his feet, and
summoning an attendant he bade him go and stop the massacre.[3] It was too late; the
bloody work had begun. The great bell of the Palace had now begun to toll;
another moment and every steeple in Paris was sending forth its peal; a hundred
tocsins sounded at once; and with the tempest of their clamor there mingled the
shouts, oaths, and howlings of the assassins. "I was awakened," says Sully,
"three hours after midnight with the ringing of all the bells, and the contimed
cries of the populace."[4] Above all were heard the
terrible words, "Kill, kill!"
The massacre was to begin with the
assassination of Coligny, and that part of the dreadful work had been assigned
to the Duke of Guise. The moment he heard the signal, the duke mounted his horse
and, accompanied by his brother and 300 gentlemen and soldiers, galloped off for
the admiral's lodging. He found Anjou's guards with their red cloaks, and their
lighted matches, posted round it; they gave the duke with his armed retinue
instant admission into the court-yard. To slaughter the halberdiers of Navarre,
and force open the inner entrance of the admiral's lodgings, was the work of but
a few minutes. They next mountd the stairs, while the duke and his gentlemen
remained below. Awakened by the noise, the admiral got out of bed, and wrapping
his dressing-gown round him and leaning against the wall, he bade Merlin, his
minister, join with him in prayer. One of his gentlemen at that moment rushed
into the room. "My lord," said he, "God calls us to himself!" "I am prepared to
die," replied the admiral; "I need no more the help of men; therefore, farewell,
my friends; save yourselves, if it is still possible." They all left him and
escaped by the roof of the house. Co1igny, his son-in-law, fleeing in this way
was shot, and rolled into the street. A German servant alone remained behind
with his master. The door of the chamber was now forced open, and seven of the
murderers entered, headed by Behme of Lorraine, and Achille Petrucci of Sienna,
creatures of the Duke of Guise. "Art thou Coligny?" said Behme, presenting
himself before his victim, and awed by the perfect composure and venerable
aspect of the admiral. "I am," replied Coligny; "young man, you ought to respect
my grey hairs; but do what you will, you can shorten my life only by a few
days." The villain replied by plunging his weapon into the admiral's breast; the
rest closing round struck their daggers into him. "Behme," shouted the duke from
below, "hast done?" "Tis all over," cried the assassin from the window. "But M.
d'Angouleme," replied the duke, "will not believe it till he see him at his
feet." Taking up the corpse, Behme threw it over the window, and as it fell on
the pavement, the blood spurted on the faces and clothes of the two lords. The
duke, taking out his handkerchief and wiping the face of the murdered man, said,
"Tis he sure enough," and kicked the corpse in its face. A servant of the Duke
of Nevers cut off the head, and carried it to Catherine de Medici and the king.
The trunk was exposed for some days to disgusting indignities; the head was
embalmed, to be sent to Rome; the bloody trophy was carried as far as Lyons, but
there all trace of it disappears.[5]
The authors of the
plot having respect to the maxim attributed to Alaric, that "thick grass is more
easily mown than thin," had gathered the leading Protestants that night, as we
have already narrated, into the same quarter where Coligny lodged. The Duke of
Guise had kept this quarter as his special preserve; and now, the admiral being
dispatched, the guards of Anjou, with a creature of the duke's for their
captain, were let loose upon this battue of ensnared Huguenots. Their work was
done with a summary vengeance, to which the flooded state of the kennels, and
the piles of corpses, growing ever larger, bore terrible witness. Over all Paris
did the work of massacre by this time extend. Furious bands, armed with guns,
pistols, swords, pikes, knives, and all kinds of cruel weapons, rushed through
the streets, murdering all they met. They began to thunder at the doors of
Protestants, and the terrified inmates, stunned by the uproar, came forth in
their night-clothes, and were murdered on their own thresholds. Those who were
too aftrighted to come abroad, were slaughtered in their bed-rooms and closets,
the assassins bursting open all places of concealment, and massacring all who
opposed their entrance, and throwing their mangled bodies into the street. The
darkness would have been a cover to some, but the lights that blazed in the
windows denied even this poor chance of escape to the miserable victims. The
Huguenot as he fled through the street, with agonized features, and lacking the
protection of the white scarf, was easily recognised, and dispatched without
mercy.
The Louvre was that night the scene of a great butchery. Some 200
Protestant noblemen and gentlemen from the provinces had been accommodated with
beds in the palace; and although the guests of the king, they had no exemption,
but were doomed that night to die with others. They were aroused after midnight,
taken out one by one, and made to pass between two rows of halberdiers, who were
stationed in the underground galleries. They were hacked in pieces or poniarded
on their way, and their corpses being carried forth were horrible to relate,
piled in heaps at the gates of the Louvre. Among those who thus perished were
the Count de la Rochefoucault, the Marquis de Renel, the brave Piles—who had so
gallantly defended St. Jean D'Angely—Francourt, chancellor to the King of
Navarre, and others of nearly equal distinction. An appeal to the God of Justice
was their only protest against their fate.[6]
By-and-by the sun
rose; but, alas! who can describe the horrors which the broad light of day
disclosed to view? The entire population of the French capital was seen maddened
with rage, or aghast with terror. On its wretched streets what tragedies of
horror and crime were being enacted! Some were fleeing, others were pursuing;
some were supplicating for life, others were responding by the murderous blow,
which, if it silenced the cry for mercy, awoke the cry for justice. Old men, and
infants in their swaddling clothes, were alike butchered on that awful night.
Our very page would weep, were we to record all the atrocities now enacted.
Corpses were being precipitated from the roofs and windows, others were being
dragged through the streets by the feet, or were piled up in carts, and driven
away to be shot into the river. The kennels were running with blood. Guise,
Tavannes, and D'Angoul~me—traversing the streets on horseback, and raising their
voices to their highest pitch, to be audible above the tolling of the bells, the
yells of the murderers, and the cries and moanings of the wounded and the
dying—were inciting to yet greater fury those whom hate and blood had already
transformed into demons. "It is the king's orders!" cried Guise. "Blood, blood!"
shouted out Tavannes. Blood! every kennel was full; the Seine as it rolled
through Paris seemed but a river of blood; and the corpses which it was bearing
to the ocean were so numerous that the bridges had difficulty in giving them
passage, and were in some danger of becoming choked and turning back the stream,
and drowning Paris in the blood of its own shedding. Such was the gigantic
horror on which the sun of that Sunday morning, the 24th of August, 1572 —St.
Bartholomew's Day—looked down.
We have seen how Charles IX stood
shuddering for some moments on the brink of his great crime, and that, had it
not been for the stronger will and more daring wickedness of his mother, he
might after all have turned back. But when the massacre had commenced, and he
had tasted of blood, Charles shuddered no longer he became as ravenous for
slaughter as the lowest of the mob. He and his mother, when it was day, went out
on the palace balcony to feast their eyes upon the scene. Some Huguenots were
seen struggling in the river, in their efforts to swim across, the boats having
been removed. Seizing an arquebus, the king fired on them. "Kill, kill!" he
shouted; and making a page sit beside him and load his piece,[7] he continued the horrible
pastime of murdering his subjects, who were attempting to escape across the
Seine, or were seeking refuge at the pitiless gates of his palace.[8]
The same night,
while the massacres were in progress, Charles sent for the King of Navarre and
the Prince de Conde. Receiving them in great anger, he commanded them with oaths
to renounce the Protestant faith, threatening them with death as the alternative
of refusal. They demurred: whereupon the king gave them three days to make their
choice.[9] His physician, Ambrose
Pare, a Protestant, he kept all night in his cabinet, so selfishly careful was
he of his own miserable life at the very moment that he was murdering in
thousands the flower of his subjects. Pare he also attempted to terrify by oaths
and threats into embracing Romanism, telling him that the time was now come when
every man in France must become Roman Catholic. So apparent was it that the
leading motive of Charles IX in these great crimes was the dominancy of the
Roman faith and the entire extinction of Protestantism.
For seven days
the massacres were continued in Paris, and the first three especially with
unabating fury. Nor were they confined within the walls of the city. In
pursuance of orders sent from the court,[10] they were extended to all
provinces and cities where Protestants were found. Even villages and chateaux
became scenes of carnage. For two months these butcheries were continued
throughout the kingdom. Every day during that fearful time the poniard reaped a
fresh harvest of victims, and the rivers bore to the sea a new and ghastly
burden of corpses. In Rouen above 6,000 perished; at Toulouse some hundreds were
hewn to pieces with axes; at Orleans the Papists themselves confessed that they
had destroyed 12,000; some said 18,000; and at Lyons not a Protestant escaped.
After the gates were closed they fell upon them without mercy; 150 of them were
shut up in the archbishop's house, and were cut to pieces in the space of one
hour and a half. Some Roman Catholic, more humane than the rest, when he saw the
heaps of corpses, exclaimed, "They surely were not men, but devils in the shape
of men, who had done this."
The whole number that perished in the
massacre cannot be precisely ascertained. According to De Thou there were 2,000
victims in Paris the first day; Agrippa d'Aubigne says 3,000. Brantome speaks of
4.000 bodies that Charles IX might have seen floating down the Seine. La
Popeliniere reduces them to 1,000. "There is to be found, in the account-books
of the city of Paris, a payment to the grave-diggers of the Cemetery of the
Innocents, for having inferred 1,100 dead bodies stranded at the turns of the
Seine near Chaillot, Antenil, and St. Cloud; it is probable that many corpses
were carried still further, and the corpses were not all thrown into the
river."[11] There is a still greater
uncertainty touching the number of victims throughout the whole of France.
Mezeray computes it at 25,000; De Thou at 30,000; Sully at 70,000; and Perefixe,
Archbishop of Paris in the seventeenth century, raises it to 100,000; Davila
reduces it to 10,000. Sully, from his access to official documents, and his
unimpeachable honor, has been commonly reckoned the highest authority. Not a few
municipalities and governors, to their honor, refused to execute the orders of
the king. The reply of the Vicompte d'Orte has become famous. "Sire," wrote he
to Charles IX, "among the citizens and garrison of Bayonne, you have many brave
soldiers, and loyal subjects, but not one hangman."[12]
Blood and falsehood
are never far apart. The great crime had been acted and could not be recalled;
how was it to be justified? The poor unhappy king had recourse to one dodge
after another, verifying the French saying that "to excuse is to accuse one's
self." On the evening of the first day of the massacre, he dispatched messengers
to the provinces to announce the death of Coligny, and the slaughters in Paris,
attributing everything to the feud which had so long subsisted between Guise and
the admiral. A day's reflection convinced the king that the duke would force him
to acknowledge his own share in the massacre, and he saw that he must concoct
another excuse; he would plead a political necessity. Putting his lie in the
form of an appeal to the Almighty, he went, attended by the whole court, to
mass, solemnly to thank God for having delivered him from the Protestants; and
on his return, holding "a bed of justice," he professed to unveil to the
Parliament a terrible plot which Coligny and the Huguenots had contrived for
destroying the king and the royal house, which had left him no alternative but
to order the massacre. Although the king's story was not supported by one atom
of solid truth, but on the other hand was contradicted by a hundred facts, of
which the Parliament was cognisant, the obsequious members sustained the king's
accusation, and branded with outlawry and forfeiture the name, the titles, the
family, and the estates of Admiral de Coligny. The notorious and brazen-faced
Retz was instructed to tell England yet another falsehood, namely, that Coligny
was meditating playing the part of Pepin, mayor of the palace, and that the king
did a wise and politic thing in nipping the admiral's treason in the bud. To the
court of Poland, Charles sent, by his ambassador Montluc, another version of the
affair; and to the Swiss yet another; in short, the inconsistencies,
prevarications, and contradictions of the unhappy monarch were endless, and
attest his guilt not less conclusively than if he had confessed the deed.
Meanwhile, the tidings were travelling over Europe, petrifying some nations with
horror, awakening others into delirious and savage joy. When the news of the
massacre reached the Spanish army in the Netherlands the exultation was great.
The skies resounded with salvoes of cannon; the drums were beat, the trumpets
blared, and at night bonfires blazed all round the camp. The reception which
England gave the French ambassador was dignified and most significant. Fenelon's
description of his first audience after the news of the massacre had arrived is
striking. "A gloomy sorrow," says he, "sat on every face; silence, as in the
dead of night, reigned through all the chambers of the royal residence. The
ladies and courtiers, clad in deep mourning, were ranged on each side; and as I
passed by them, in my approach to the queen, not one bestowed on me a favorable
look, or made the least return to my salutations."[13] Thus did England show that
she held those whom the King of France had barbarously murdered as her
brethren.
We turn to Geneva. Geneva was yet more tenderly related to the
seventy thousand victims whose bodies covered the plains of France, or lay
stranded on the banks of its rivers. It is the 30th of August, 1572. Certain
merchants have just arrived at Geneva from Lyons; leaving their pack-horses and
bales in charge of the master of their hotel, they mount with all speed the
street leading to the Hotel de Ville, anxiety and grief painted on their faces;
"Messieurs," said they to the counselors, "a horrible massacre of our brethren
has just taken place at Lyons. In all the villages on our route we have seen the
gibbets erected, and blood flowing; it seems that it is the same all over
France. Tomorrow, or the day after, you will see those who have escaped the
butchery arrive on your frontier." The distressing news spread like lightning
through the town; the shops were closed, and the citizens met in companies in
the squares. Their experience of the past had taught them the demands which this
sad occurrence would make on their benevolence. Indoors the women busied
themselves providing clothes, medicines, and abundance of viands for those whom
they expected soon to see arrive in hunger and sickness. The magistrates
dispatched carriages and litters to the villages in the Pays de Gex; the
peasants and the pastors were on the outlook on the frontier to obtain news, and
to be ready to succor the first arrivals. Nor had they long to wait. On the 1st
of September they beheld certain travelers approaching, pale, exhausted by
fatigue, and responding with difficulty to the caresses with which they were
overwhelmed. They could hardly believe 'their own safety, seeing that days
before, in every village through which they passed, they had been inimminent
danger of death. The number of these arrivals rapidly increased; they now showed
their wounds, which they had carefully concealed, lest they should thereby be
known to belong to the Reformed.
They declared that since the 26th of
August the fields and villages had been deluged with the blood of their
brethren. All of them gave thanks to God that they had been permitted to reach a
"land of liberty." Their hearts were full of heaviness, for not one family was
complete; when they mustered on the frontier, alas! how many parents, children,
and friends were missing! By-and-by this sorrowful group reached the gates of
Geneva, and as they advanced along the streets, the citizens contended with each
other for the privilege of entertaining those of the travelers who appeared the
greatest sufferers. The wounded were conveyed to the houses of the best
families, where they were nursed with the most tender care. So ample was the
hospitality of the citizens, that the magistrates found it unnecessary to make
any public distribution of clothes or victuals.[14]
On the suggestion
of Theodore Beza, a day of general fasting was observed, and appointed to be
repeated every year on St. Bartholomew's Day. On the arrival of the news in
Scotland, Knox, now old and worn out with labors, made himself be borne to his
pulpit, and "summoning up the remainder of his strength," says McCrie, "he
thundered the vengeance of Heaven against 'that cruel murderer and false
traitor, the King of France,' and desired Le Croc, the French ambassador, to
tell his master that sentence was pronounced against him in Scotland; that the
Divine vengeance would never depart from him, nor from his house, if repentance
did not ensue; but his name would remain an execration to posterity, and none
proceeding from his loins would enjoy his kingdom in peace."[15]
At Rome, when the
news arrived, the joy was boundless. The messenger who carried the despatch was
rewarded like one who brings tidings of some great victory,[16] and the triumph that
followed was such as old pagan Rome might have been proud to celebrate. The news
was thundered forth to the inhabitants of the Seven-hilled City by the cannon of
St. Angelo, and at night bonfires blazed on the street. Before this great day,
Pius V, as we have already seen, slept with the Popes of former times, and his
ashes, consigned to the vaults of St. Peter's, waited the more gorgeous tomb
that was preparing for them in Santa Maria Maggiore; but Gregory XIII conducted
the rejoicings with even greater splendor than the austere Pius would probably
have done. Through the streets of the Eternal City swept, in the full blaze of
Pontifical pomp, Gregory and his attendant train of cardinals, bishops, and
monks, to the Church of St. Mark, there to offer up prayers and thanksgivings to
the God of heaven for this great blessing to the See of Rome and the Roman
Catholic Church. Over the portico of the church was hung a cloth of purple, on
which was a Latin inscription most elegantly embroidered in letters of gold, in
which it was distinctly stated that the massacre had occurred after "counsels
had been given."[17]
On the following
day the Pontiff went in procession to the Church of Minerva, where, after mass,
a jubilee was published to all Christendom, "that they might thank God for the
slaughter of the enemies of the Church, lately executed in France." A third time
did the Pope go in procession, with his cardinals and all the foreign ambassadom
then resident at his court, and after mass in the Church of St. Louis, he
accepted homage from the Cardinal of Lorraine, and thanks in the name of the
King of France, "for the counsel and help he had given him by his prayers, of
which he had found the most wonderful effects."
But as if all this had
not been enough, the Pope caused certain more enduring monuments of the St.
Bartholomew to be set up, that not only might the event be held in everlasting
remembrance, but his own approval of it be proclaimed to the ages to come. The
Pope, says Bonanni, "gave orders for a painting, descriptive of the slaughter of
the admiral and his companions, to be made in the hall of the Vatican by Georgio
Vasari, as a monument of vindicated religion, and a trophy of exterminated
heresy." These representations form three different frescoes.[18] The first, in which the
admiral is represented as wounded by Maurevel, and carried home, has this
inscription—Gaspar Colignius Amirallius accepto vulnere domura refertur. Greg.
XIII, Pontif. Max., 1572. [19] The second, which exhibits
Coligny murdered in his own house, with Teligny and others, has these words
below it—Coedes Colignii et sociorum ejus.[20] The third, in which the
king is represented as hearing the news, is thus entitled—Rex netera Colignii
Frobat.[21]
The better to
perpetuate the memory of the massacre, Gregory caused a medal to be struck, the
device on which, as Bonanni interprets it, inculcates that the St. Bartholomew
was the joint result of the Papal counsel and God's instnmmntality. On the one
side is a profile of the Pope, surrounded by the words—Gregorius XIII, Pont.
Max., an. I. On the obverse is seen an angel bearing in the one hand a cross, in
the other a drawn sword, with which he is smiting a prostrate host of
Protestants; and to make all clear, above is the motto—Ugonot-toturn strages,
1572. [22]
CHAPTER
17 Back to
Top
RESURRECTION OF HUGUENOTISM—DEATH OF
CHARLES IX.
After the Storm — Revival—Siege of
Sancerre—Horrors—Bravery of the Citizens—The Siege Raised—La Rochelle—The
Capital of French Protestantism — Its Prosperous Condition—Its Siege—Brave
Defense— The Besiegers Compelled to Retire—A Year after St. Bartholomew—Has
Coligny Risen from the Dead?—First Anniversary of the St. Bartholomew — The
Huguenots Reappear at Court—New Demands— Mortification of the Court—A
Politico-Ecclesiastical Confederation formed by the Huguenots—The Tiers Parti—
Illness of Charles IX. — Hie Sweat cf Blood — Remorse — His Huguenot Nurse — His
Death.
When the terrible storm of the St. Bartholomew Day
had passed, men expected to open their eyes on only ruins. The noble vine that
had struck its roots so deep in the soil of France, and with a growth so
marvellous was sending out its boughs on every side, and promising to fill the
land, had been felled to the earth by a cruel and sudden blow, and never again
would it lift its branches on high. So thought Charles IX and the court of
France. They had closed the civil wars in the blood of Coligny and his 70,000
fellow-victims. The governments of Spain and Rome did not doubt that Huguenotism
had received its death-blow. Congratulations were exchanged between the courts
of the Louvre, the Escorial, and the Vatican on the success which had crowned
their projects. The Pope, to give enduring expression to these felicitations,
struck, as we have seen, a commemorative medal. That medal said, in effect, that
Protestantism had been! No second medal, of like import, would Gregory XIII, or
any of his successors, ever need to issue; for the work had been done once for
all; the revolt of Wittemberg and Geneva had been quelled in a common overthrow,
and a new era of splendor had dawned on the Popedom.
In proportion to the
joy that reigned in the Romanist camp, so was the despondency that weighed upon
the spirits of the Reformed. They too, in the first access of their
consternation and grief, believed that Protestantism had been fatally smitten.
Indeed, the loss which the cause had sustained was tremendous, and seemed
irretrievable. The wise counselors, the valiant warriors, the learned and pious
pastors—in short, that whole array of genius, and learning, and influence that
adorned Protestantism in France, and which, humanly speaking, were the bulwarks
around it—had been swept away by this one terrible blow.
And truly, had
French Protestantism been a mere political association, with oniy earthly bonds
to hold its members together, and only earthly motives to inspire them with hope
and urge them to action, the St. Bartholomew Massacre would have terminated its
career. But the cause was Divine; it drew its life from hidden sources, and so,
flourishing from what both friend and foe believed to be its grave, it stood up
anew, prepared to fight ever so many battles and mount ever so many scaffolds,
in the faith that it would yet triumph in that land which had been so profusely
watered with its blood.
The massacre swept the cities and villages on the
plains of France with so unsparing a fury, that in many of these not a
Protestant was left breathing; but the mountainous districts were less terribly
visited, and these now became the stronghold of Huguenotism. Some fifty towns
situated in these parts closed their gates, and stood to their defense. Their
inhabitants knew that to admit the agents of the government was simply to offer
their throats to the assassins of Charles; and rather than court wholesale
butchery, or ignominiously yield, they resolved to fight like men. Some of these
cities were hard put to it in the carrying out of this resolution. The sieges of
La Rochelle and Sancerre have a terribly tragic interest. The latter, though a
small town, held out against the royal forces for more than ten months. Greatly
inferior to the enemy in numbers, the citizens labored under the further
disadvantage of lacking arms. They appeared on the ramparts with slings instead
of fire-arms; but, unlike their assailants, they defended their cause with hands
unstained with murder. "We light here," was the withering taunt which they flung
down upon the myrmidons of Catherine —"We fight here: go and assassinate
elsewhere." Famine was more fatal to them than the sword; for while the battle
slew only eighty- four of their number, the famine killed not fewer than 500.
The straits now endured by the inhabitants of Sancerre recall the miseries of
the siege of Jerusalem, or the horrors of Paris in the winter of 1870-71. An
eye-witness, Pastor Jean de Lery, has recorded in his Journal the incidents of
the siege, and his tale is truly a harrowing one. "The poor people had to feed
on dogs, cats, mice, snails, moles, grass, bread made of straw, ground into
powder and mixed with pounded slate; they had to consume harness, leather, the
parchment of old books, title-deeds, and letters, which they softened by soaking
in water." These were the revolting horrors of their cuisine. "I have seen on a
table," says Lery, "food on which the printed characters were still legible, and
you might even read from the pieces lying on the dishes ready to be eaten." The
mortality of the young by the famine was frightful; scarce a child under twelve
years survived. Their faces grew to be like parchment; their skeleton figures
and withered limbs; their glazed eye and dried tongue, which could not even
wail, were too horrible for the mother to look on, and thankful she was when
death came to terminate the sufferings of her offspring. Even grown men were
reduced to skeletons, and wandered like phantoms in the street, where often they
dropped down and expired of sheer hunger.[1] Yet that famine could not
subdue their resolution. The defense of the town went on, the inhabitants
choosing to brave the horrors which they knew rather than, by surrendering to
such a foe, expose themselves to horrors which they knew not. A helping hand was
at length stretched out to them from the distant Poland. The Protestantism of
that country was then in its most flourishing condition, and the Duke of Anjou,
Catherine's third son, being a candidate for the vacant throne, the Poles made
it a condition that he should ameliorate the state of the French Huguenots, and
accordingly the siege of Sancerre was raised.
It was around La Rochelle
that the main body of the royal army was drawn. The town was the capital of
French Protestantism, and the usual rendezvous of its chiefs. It was a large and
opulent city, "fortified after the modern way with moats, walls, bulwarks, and
ramparts."[2] It was open to the sea,
and the crowd of ships that filled its harbor, and which rivaled in numbers the
royal navy, gave token of the enriching commerce of which it was the seat. Its
citizens were distinguished by their intelligence, their liberality, and above
all, their public spirit. When the massacre broke out, crowds of Protestant
gentlemen, as well as of peasants, together with some fifty pastors, fleeing
from the sword of the murderers, found refuge within its walls. Thither did the
royal forces follow them, shutting in La Rochelle on the land side, while the
navy blockaded it by the sea. Nothing dismayed, the citizens closed their gates,
hoisted the flag of defiance on their walls, and gave Anjou, who conducted the
siege, to understand that the task he had now on hand would not be of so easy
execution as a cowardly massacre planned in darkness, like that which had so
recently crimsoned all France, and of which he had the credit of being one of
the chief instigators. Here he must fight in open day, and with men who were
determined that he should enter their city only when it was a mass of ruins. He
began to thunder against it with his cannon; the Rochellese were not slow to
reply. Devout as well as heroic, before forming on the ramparks they kneeled
before the God of battles in their churches, and then with a firm step, and
singing the Psalms of David as they marched onward, they mounted the wall, and
looked down with faces undismayed upon the long lines of the enemy. The ships
thundered from the sea, the troops assailed on land; but despite this double
tempest, there was the flag of defiance still waving on the walls of the
beleaguered city. They might have capitulated to brave men and soldiers, but to
sue for peace from an army of assassins, from the train-bands of a monarch who
knew not how to reward men who were the glory of his realm, save by devoting
them to the dagger, rather would they die a hundred times. Four long months the
battle raged; innumerable mines were dug and exploded; portions of the wall fell
in and the soldiers of Anjou hurried to the breach in the hope of taking the
city. It was now only that they realized the full extent of the difficulty. The
forest of pikes on which they were received, and the deadly volleys poured into
them, sent them staggering down the breach and back to the camp. Not fewer than
twenty-nine times did the besiegers attempt to carry La Rochelle by storm; but
each time they were repulsed,[3] and forced to retreat,
leaving a thick trail of dead and wounded to mark their track. Thus did this
single town heroically withstand the entire military power of the government.
The Duke of Anjou saw his army dwindling away. Twenty-nine fatal repulses had
greatly thinned its ranks. The siege made no progress. The Rochellese still
scowled defiance from the summit of their ruined defences. What was to be
done?
At that moment a messenger arrived in the camp with tidings that
the Duke of Anjou had been elected to the throne of Poland. One cannot but
wonder that a nation so brave, and so favorably disposed as the Poles then were
towards Protestantism, should have made choice of a creature so paltry,
cowardly, and vicious to reign over them. But the occurrence furnished the duke
with a pretext of which he was but too glad to avail himself for quitting a city
which he was now convinced he never would be able to take. Thus did deliverance,
come to La Rochelle. The blood spilt in its defense had not been shed in vain.
The Rochellese had maintained their independence; they had rendered a service to
the Protestantism of Europe; they had avenged in part the St. Bartholomew; they
had raised the renown of the Huguenot arms; and now that the besiegers were
gone, they set about rebuilding their fallen ramparts, and repairing the
injuries their city had sustained; and they had the satisfaction of seeing the
flow of political and commercial prosperity, which had been so rudely
interrupted, gradually return.
By the time these transactions were
terminated, a year wellnigh had elapsed since the great massacre. Catherine and
Charles could now calculate what they had gained by this enormous crime. Much
had France lost abroad, for though Catherine strove by enormous lying to
persuade the world that she had not done the deed, or at least that the
government had been forced in self-defense to do it, she could get no one to
believe her. To compensate for the loss of prestige and influence abroad, what
had she gained at home? Literally nothing. The Huguenots in all parts of France
were coming forth from their hiding-places; important towns were defying the
royal arms; whole districts were Protestant; and the denlands of the Huguenots
were once more beginning to be heard, loud and firm as ever. What did all this
mean? Had not Alva and Catherine dug the grave of Huguenotism? Had not Charles
assisted at its burial? and had not the Pope set up its gravestone? What right
then had the Huguenots to be seen any more in France? Had Coligny risen from the
dead, with his mountain Huguenots, who had chased Anjou back to Paris, and
compelled Charles to sign the Peace of St. Germain? Verily it seemed as if it
were so. A yet greater humiliation awaited the court. When the 24th of August,
1573—the anniversary of the massacre—came round, the Huguenots selected the day
to meet and draw up new demands, which they were to present to the
government.
Obtaining an interview with Charles and his mother, the
delegates boldly demanded, in the name of the whole body of the Protestants, to
be replaced in the position they occupied before St. Bartholomew's Day, and to
have back all the privileges of the Pacification of 1570. The king listened in
mute stupefaction. Catherine, pale with anger, made answer with a haughtiness
that ill became her position. "What! " said she, "although the Prince of Conde
had been still alive, and in the field with 20,000 horse and 50,000 foot, he
would not have dared to ask half of what you now demand." But the Queen-mother
had to digest her mortification as best she could. Her troops had been worsted;
her kingdom was full of anarchy; discord reigned in the very palace; her third
son, the only one she loved, was on the point of leaving her for Poland; there
were none around her whom she could trust; and certainly there was no one who
trusted her; the only policy open to her, therefore, was one of conciliation.
Hedged in, she was made to feel that her way was a hard one. The St. Bartholomew
Massacre was becoming bitter even to its authors, and Catherine now saw that she
would have to repeat it not once, but many times, before she could erase the
"religion," restore the glories of the Roman Catholic worship in France, and
feel herself firmly seated in the government of the country.
To the still
further dismay of the court, the Protestants took a step in advance. Portentous
theories of a social kind began at this time to lift up their heads in France.
The infatuated daughter of the Medici thought that, could she extirpate
Protestantism, Roman Catholicism would be left in quiet possession of the land;
little did she foresee the strange doctrines foreshadowings of those of 1789,
and of the Commune of still later days— that were so soon to start up and
fiercely claim to share supremacy with the Church.
The Huguenots of the
sixteenth century did not indeed espouse the new opinions which struck at the
basis of government as it was then settled, but they acted upon them so far as
to set up a distinct politico-ecclesiastical confederation. The objects aimed at
in this new association were those of self-government and mutual defense. A
certain number of citizens were selected in each of the Huguenot towns. These
formed a governing body in all matters appertaining to the Protestants. They
were, in short, so many distinct Protestant municipalities, analogous to those
cities of the Middle Ages which, although subject to the sway of the feudal
lord, had their own independent municipal government. Every six months,
delegates from these several municipalities met together, and constituted a
supreme council. This council had power to impose taxes, to administer justice,
and, when threatened with violence by the government, to raise soldiers and
carry on war. This was a State within a State. The propriety of the step is open
to question, but it is not to be hastily condemned. The French Government had
abdicated its functions. It neither respected the property nor defended the
lives of the Huguenots. It neither executed the laws of the State in their
behalf, nor fulfilled a moment longer than it had the power to break them the
special treaties into which it had entered. So far from redressing their wrongs,
it was the foremost party to inflict wrong and outrage upon them. In short,
society in that unhappy country was dissolved, and in so unusual a state of
things, it were hard to deny the Protestants the fight to make the best
arrangements they could for the defense of their natural and social
rights.
At the court even there now arose a party that threw its shield
over the Huguenots. That party was known as the Politiques or Tiers Parti.[4] It was compesed mostly of
men who were the disciples of the great Chancellor de l'Hopital, whose views
were so far in advance of the age in which he lived, and whose reforms in law
and the administration of justice made him one of the pioneers of better and
more tolerant times. The chancellor was now dead—happily for himself, before the
extinction of so many names which were the glory of his country—but his liberal
opinions survived in a small party which was headed by the three sons of the
Constable Montmorency, and the Marshals Cose and Biron. These men were not
Huguenots; on the contrary, they were Romanists, but they abhorred the policy of
extermination pursued toward the Protestants, and they lamented the strifes
which were wasting the strength, lowering the character, and extinguishing the
glory of France. Though living in an age not by any means fastidious, the
spectacle of the court—now become a horde of poisoners, murderers, and
harlots—filled them with disgust. They wished to bring back something like
national feeling and decency of manners to their country. Casting about if haply
there were any left who might aid them in their schemes, they offered their
alliance to the Huguenots. They meant to make a beginning by expelling the swarm
of foreigners which Catherine had gathered round her. Italians and Spaniards
filled the offices at court, and in return for their rich pensions rendered no
service but flattery, and taught no arts but those of magic and assassination.
The leaders of the Tiers Parti hoped by the assistance of the Huguenots to expel
these creatures from the government which they had monopolized, and to restore a
national regime, liberal and tolerant, and such as might heal the deep wounds of
their country, and recover for France the place she had lost in Europe. The
existence of this party was known to Catberine, and she had divined, too, the
cleansing they meant to make in the Augean stable of the Louvre. Such a
reformation not being at all to her taste, she began again to draw toward the
Huguenots. Thus wonderfully were they shielded.
There followed a few
years of dubious policy on the part of Catherine, of fruitless schemes on the
part of the Politiques, and of uncertain prospects to all parties. While matters
were hanging thus in the balance, Charles IX died.[5] His life
had been full of excitement, of base pleasures, and of bloody crimes, and his
death was full of horrors. But as the curtain is about to drop, a ray—a solitary
ray—is seen to shoot across the darkness. No long time after the perpetration of
the massacre, Charles IX began to be visited with remorse. The awful scene would
not quit his memory. By day, whether engaged in business or mingling in the
gaieties of the court, the sights and sounds of the massacre would rise unbidden
before his imagination; and at night its terrors would return in his dreams. As
he lay in his bed, he would start up from broken slumber, crying out, "Blood,
blood!" Not many days after the massacre, there came a flock of ravens and
alighted upon the roof of the Louvre. As they flitted to and fro they filled the
air with their dismal croakings. This would have given no uneasiness to most
people; but the occupants of the Louvre had guilty consciences. The impieties
and witchcrafts in which they lived had made them extremely superstitious, and
they saw in the ravens other creatures than they seemed, and heard in their
screams more terrible sounds than merely earthly ones. The ravens were driven
away; the next day, at the same hour, they returned, and so did they for many
days in succession.
There, duly at the appointed time, were the sable
visitants of the Louvre, performing their gyrations round the roofs and chimneys
of the ill-omened palace, and making its courts resound with the echoes of their
horrid cawings. This did not tend to lighten the melancholy of the
king.
One night he awoke with fearful sounds in his ears. It seemed—so he
thought—that a dreadful fight was going on in the city. There were shoutings and
shrieks and curses, and mingling with these were the tocsin's knell and the
sharp ring of fire-arms—in short, all those dismal noises which had filled Paris
on the night of the massacre. A messenger was dispatched to ascertain the cause
of the uproar. He returned to say that all was at peace in the city, and that
the sounds which had so terrified the king were wholly imaginary. These
incessant apprehensions brought on at last an illness. The king's constitution,
sickly from the first, had been drained of any original vigor it ever possessed
by the vicious indulgences in which he lived, and into which his mother, for her
own vile ends, had drawn him; and now his decline was accelerated by the agonies
of remorse — thee Nemesis of the St. Bartholomew. Charles was rapidly
approaching the grave. It was now that a malady of a strange and frightful kind
seized upon him. Blood began to ooze from all the pores of his body. On
awakening in the morning his person would be wet all over with what appeared a
sweat of blood, and a crimson mark on the bed-clothes would show where he had
lain. Mignet and other historians have given us most affecting accounts of the
king's last hours, but we content ourselves with an extract from the old
historian Estoile. And be it known that the man who stipulated orders for the
St. Bartholomew Massacre that not a single Huguenot should be left alive to
reproach him with the deed, was waited upon on his death-bed by a Huguenot
nurse! "As she seated herself on a chest," says Estoile, "and was beginning to
doze, she heard the king moan and weep and sigh. She came gently to his bedside,
and adjusting the bed-clothes, the king began to speak to her; and heaving a
deep sigh, and while the tears poured down, and sobs choked his utterance, he
said, 'Ah, nurse, dear nurse, what blood, what murders! Ah, I have followed bad
advice.
Oh, my God, forgive me! Have pity on me, if it please thee. I do
not know what will become of me. What shall I do? I am lost; I see it plainly.'
Then the nurse said to him, 'Sire, may the murders be on those who made you do
them; and since you do not consent to them, and are sorry for them, believe that
God will not impute them to you, but will cover them with the robe of his Son's
justice. To him alone you must address yourself.'" Charles IX died on the 30th
of May, 1574, just twenty-one months after the St. Bartholomew Massacre, having
lived twenty-five years and reignned fourteen.[6]
CHAPTER
18 Back to
Top
NEW PERSECUTIONS—REIGN AND DEATH OF
HENRY III.
Henry III—A Sensualist and Tyrant—Persecuting Edict—Henry
of Navarre—His Character—The Protestants Recover their Rights—The
League—War—Henry III Joins the League—Gallantry of "Henry of the White
Plume"—Dissension between Henry III and the Duke of Guise— Murder of
Guise—Murder of the Cardinal of Lorraine—Henry III and Henry of Navarre Unite
their Arms—March on Paris—Henry III Assassinated—Death of Catherine de
Medici.
The Duke of Anjou, the heir to the throne, was in
Poland when Charles IX died. He had been elected king of that country, as we
have stated, but he had already brought it to the brink of civil war by the
violations of his coronation oath. When he heard that his brother was dead, he
stole out of Poland, hurried back to Paris, and became King of France under the
title of Henry III. This prince was shamelessly vicious, and beyond measure
effeminate. Neglecting business, he would shut himself up for days together with
a select band of youths, debauchers like himself, and pass the time in orgies
which shocked even the men of that age. He was the tyrant and the bigot, as well
as the voluptuary, and the ascetic fit usually alter-nated at short intervals
with the sensual one. He passed from the beast to the monk, and from the monk to
the beast, but never by any chance was he the man. It is true we find no St.
Bartholomew in this reign, but that was because the first had made a second
impossible. That the will was not wanting is attested by the edict with which
Henry opened his reign, and which commanded all his subjects to conform to the
religion of Rome or quit the kingdom. His mother, Catherine de Medici, still
held the regency; and we trace her hand in this tyrannous decree, which happily
the government had not the power to enforce. Its impolicy was great, and it
instantly recoiled upon the king, for it advertised the Huguenots that the
dagger of the St. Bartholomew was still suspended above their heads, and that
they should commit a great mistake if they did not take effectual measures
against a second surprise. Accordingly, they were careful not to let the hour of
weakness to the court pass without strengthening their own
position.
Coligny had fallen, but Henry of Navarre now came to the front.
He lacked the ripened wisdom, the steady persistency, and deep religious
convictions of the great admiral; but he was young, chivalrous, heartily with
the Protestants, and full of dash in the field. His soldiers never feared to
follow wherever they saw his white plume waving "amidst the ranks of war." The
Protestants were further reinforced by the accession of the Politiques. These
men cared nothing for the "religion," but they cared something for the honor of
France, and they were resolved to spare no pains to lift it out of the mire into
which Catherine and her allies had dragged it. At the head of this party was the
Duke of Alencon, the youngest brother of the king. This combination of parties,
formed in the spring of 1575, brought fresh courage to the Huguenots. They now
saw their cause espoused by two princes of the blood, and their attitude was
such as thoroughly to intimidate the King and Queen-mother. Never before had the
Protestants presented a bolder front or made larger demands, and bitter as the
mortification must have been, the court had nothing for it but to grant all the
concessions asked. Passing over certain matters of a political nature, it was
agreed that the public exercise of the Reformed religion should be authorized
throughout the kingdom; that the provincial Parliaments should consist of an
equal number of Roman Catholics and Protestants; that all sentences passed
against the Huguenots should be annulled; that eight towns should be placed in
their hands as a material guarantee; that they shbuld have a right to open
schools, and to hold synods; and that the States-General should meet within six
months to ratify this agreement. This treaty was signed May 6th, 1576. Thus
within four years after the St. Bartholomew Massacre, the Protestants, whom it
was supposed that that massacre had exterminated, had all their former rights
conceded to them, and in ampler measure.
The Roman Catholics opened their
eyes in astonishment. Protestant schools; Protestant congregations; Protestant
synods! They already saw all France Protestant. Taking the alarm, they promptly
formed themselves into an organisation, which has since become famous in history
under the name of "The League." The immediate aim of the League was the
prevention of the treaty just signed; its ulterior and main object was the
extirpation, root and branch, of the Huguenots. Those who were enrolled in it
bound themselves by oath to support it with their goods and lives. Its foremost
man was the Duke of Guise; its back-bone was the ferocious rabble of Paris; it
found zealous and powerful advocates in the numerous Jesuit fraternities of
France; the duty of adhesion to it was vociferously preached from the Roman
Catholic pulpits, and still more persuasively, if less noisily, urged in all the
confessionals; and we do not wonder that, with such a variety of agency to give
it importance, the League before many months had passed numbered not fewer than
30,000 members, and from being restricted to one province, as at the beginning,
it extended over all the kingdom. A clause was afterwards added to the effect
that no one should be suffered to ascend the throne of France who professed or
tolerated the detestable opinions of the Huguenots, and that they should have
recourse to arms to carry out the ends of the League. Thus were the flames of
war again lighted in France.
The north and east of the kingdom declared
in favor of the League, the towns in the south and west ranged themselves
beneath the standard of Navarre. The king was uncertain which of the two parties
he should join. Roused suddenly from his sensualities, craven in spirit, clouded
in understanding, and fallen in popular esteem, the unhappy Henry saw but few
followers around him. Navarre offered to rally the Huguenots round him, and
support the crown, would he only declare on their side. Henry hesitated; at last
he threw himself into the arms of the League, and, to cement the union between
himself and them, he revoked all the privileges of the Protestants, and
commanded them to abjure their religion or leave the kingdom. The treaty so
recently framed was swept away. The war was resumed with more bitterness than
ever. It was now that the brilliant military genius of Navarre, "Henry of the
White Plume," began to blaze forth. Skillful to plan, cool and prompt to
execute, never hesitating to carry his white plume into the thick of the fight,
and never failing to bring it out victoriously, Henry held his own in the
presence of the armies of the king and Guise. The war watered afresh with blood
the soil so often and so profusely watered before, but it was without decisive
results on either side. One thing it made evident, namely, that the main object
of the League was to wrest the scepter from the hands of Henry III, to bar the
succession of Henry of Navarre, the next heir, and place the Duke of Guise upon
the throne, and so grasp the destinies of France.
The unhappy country did
not yet know rest; for if there was now a cessation of hostilities between the
Roman Catholics and the Huguenots, a bitter strife broke out between the king
and Guise. The duke aspired to the crown. He was the popular idol; the mob and
the army were on his side, and knowing this, he was demeaning himself with great
haughtiness. The contempt he felt for the effeminacy and essential baseness of
Henry III, he did not fail to express. The king was every day losing ground, and
the prospects of the duke were in the same proportion brightening. The duke at
last ventured to come to Paris with an army, and Henry narrowly escaped being
imprisoned and slain in his own capital. Delaying the entrance of the duke's
soldiers by barricades, the first ever seen in Paris, he found time to flee, and
taking refuge in the Castle of Blois, he left Guise in possession of the
capital. The duke did not at once proclaim himself king; he thought good to do
the thing by halves; he got himself made lieutenant of the kingdom, holding
himself, at the same time, on excellent terms of friendship with Henry. Henry on
his part met the duke's hypocrisy with cool premeditated treachery. He pressed
him warmly to visit him at his Castle of Blois. His friends told him that if he
went he would never return; but he made light of all warnings, saying, with an
air that expressed his opinion of the king's courage, "He dare not." To the
Castle of Blois he went.
The king had summoned a council at the early
hour of eight o'clock to meet the duke. While the members were assembling, Guise
had arrived, and was sauntering carelessly in the hall, when a servant entered
with a message that the king wished to see him in his bed-room. To reach the
apartment in question the duke had to pass through an ante-chamber. In this
apartment had previously been posted a strong body of men-at-arms. The duke
started when his eye fell on the glittering halberds and the scowling faces of
the men; but disdaining retreat he passed on. His hand was already on the
curtain which separated the antechamber from the royal bed-room, with intent to
draw it aside and enter, when a soldier struck his dagger into him. The duke
sharply faced his assailants, but only to receive another and another stroke. He
grappled with the men, and so great was his strength that he bore them with
himself to the floor, where, after struggling a few minutes, he extricated
himself, though covered with wounds. He was able to lift the curtain, and
stagger into the room, where, falling at the foot of the bed, he expired in the
presence of the king. Henry, getting up, looked at the corpse, and kicked it
with his foot.
The Queen-mother was also at the Castle of Blois. Sick and
dying, she lay in one of the lower apartments. The king instantly descended to
visit her. "Madam," he said, "congratulate me, for I am again King of France,
seeing I have this morning slain the King of Paris." The tidings pleased
Catherine, but she reminded her son that the old fox, the uncle of the duke,
still lived, and that the morning's work could not be considered complete till
he too was dispatched. The Cardinal of Lorraine, who had lived through all these
bloody transactions, was by the royal orders speedily apprehended and slain. To
prevent the superstitious respect of the populace to the bodies of the cardinal
and the duke, their corpses were tied by a rope, let down through a window into
a heap of quicklime, and when consumed, their ashes were scattered to the winds.
Such was the end of these ambitious men.[1] Father, son, and uncle had been bloody men, and their grey
hairs were brought down to the grave with blood.
These deeds brought no
stability to Henry's power. Calamity after calamity came upon him in rapid
succession. The news of his crime spread horror through France. The Roman
Catholic population of the towns rose in insurrection, enraged at the death of
their favorite, and the League took care to fan their fury. The Sorbonne
released the subjects of the kingdom from allegiance to Henry. The Parliament of
Paris declared him deposed from the throne. The Pope, dealing him the unkindest
cut of all, excommunicated him. Within a year of the duke's death a provisional
government, with a younger brother of Guise's at its head, was installed at the
Hotel de Ville. Henry, appalled by this outburst of indignation, fled to Tours,
where such of the nobility as adhered to the royalist cause, with 2,000
soldiers, gathered round him.
This force was not at all adequate to cope
with the army of the League, and the king had nothing for it but to accept the
hand which Henry of Navarre held out to him, and which he had afore-time
rejected., Considering that Henry, as Duke of Anjou, had been one of the chief
instigators of the St. Bartholomew Massacre, it must have cost him, one would
imagine, a severe struggle of feeling to accept the aid of the Huguenots; and
not less must they have felt it, we should think, unseemly and anomalous to ally
their cause with that of the murderer of their brethren. But the flower of the
Huguenots were in their grave; the King of Navarre was not the high-minded hero
that Coligny had been. We find now a lower type of Huguenotism than before the
St. Bartholomew Massacre; so the alliance was struck, and the two armies, the
royalist and the Huguenot, were now under the same standard. Here was a new and
strange arrangement of parties in France. The League had become the champion of
the democracy against the throne, and the Huguenots rallied for the throne
against the democracy. The united army, with the two Henries at its head, now
began its march upon Paris; the forces of the League, now inferior to the enemy,
retreating before them. While on their march the king and Navarre learned that
the Pope had fulminated excommunication against them, designating them "the two
sons of wrath," and consigning them, "in the name of the Eternal King," to "the
company of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram," and "to the devil and his angels." The
weak superstitious Henry III was so terrified that for two days he ate no food.
"Cheer up, brother," said the more valorous Henry of Navarre, "Rome's bolts
don't hurt kings when they conquer." Despite the Papal bull, the march to Paris
was continued. King Henry, with his soldiers, was now encamped at St. Cloud; and
Navarre, with his Huguenots, had taken up his position at Meudon. It seemed as
if the last hour of the League had come, and that Paris must surrender. The
Protestants were overjoyed. But the alliance between the royalist and Huguenot
arms was not to prosper. The bull of the Pope was, after all, destined to bear
fruit. It awoke all the pulpits in Paris, which began to thunder against
excommunicated tyrants, and to urge the sacred duty of taking them off; and not
in vain, for a monk of the name of Jacques Clement offered himself to perform
the holy yet perilous deed. Having prepared himself by fasting and absolution,
this man, under pretense of carrying a letter, which he would give into no hands
but those of the king himself, penetrated into the royal tent, and plunged his
dagger into Henry. The League was saved, the illusions of the Huguenots were
dispelled, and there followed a sudden shifting of the scenes in France. With
Henry III the line of Valois became extinct. The race had given thirteen
sovereigns to France, and filled the throne during 261 years.
The last
Valois has fallen by the dagger. Only seventeen years have elapsed since the St.
Bartholomew Massacre, and yet the authors of that terrible tragedy are all dead,
and all of them, with one exception, have died by violence. Charles IX, smitten
with a strange and fearful malady, expired in torments. The Duke of Guise was
massacred in the Castle of Blois, the king kicking his dead body as he had done
the corpse of Coligny. The Cardinal of Lorraine was assassinated in prison; and
Henry III met his death in his own tent as we have just narrated, by the hand of
a monk. The two greatest criminals in this band of great criminals were the last
to be overtaken by vengeance. Catherine de Medici died at the Castle of Blois
twelve days after the murder of the Duke of Guise, as little cared for in her
last hours as if she had been the poorest peasant in all France; and when she
had breathed her last, "they took no more heed of her," says Estelle, "than of a
dead goat." She lived to witness the failure of all her schemes, the punishment
of all her partners in guilt, and to see her dynasty, which she had labored to
prop up by so many dark intrigues and bloody crimes, on the eve of extinction.
And when at last she went to the grave, it was amid the execrations of all
parties. "We are in a great strait about this bad woman," said a Romanist
preacher when announcing her death to his congregation; "if any of you by chance
wish, out of charity, to give her a pater or an ave, it may perhaps do her some
good." Catherine de Medici died in the seventieth year of her age; during thirty
of which she held the regency of France. Her estates and legacies were all
swallowed up by her debts.[2]
CHAPTER
19 Back to
Top
HENRY IV AND THE EDICT OF
NANTES.
Henry IV—Birth and Rearing—Assumes the Crown—Has to Fight for
the Kingdom—Victory at Dieppe—Victory at Ivry—Henry's Vacillation— His Double
Policy—Wrongs of the Huguenots—Henry turns towards Rome—Sully and
Duplessis—Their Different Counsel— Henry's Abjuration—Protestant
Organization—The Edict of Nantes— Peace— Henry as a Statesman—His Foreign Policy
— Proposed Campaign against Austria—His Forebodings—His Assassination—His
Character.
The dagger of Jacques Clement had transferred the
crown of France from the House of Valois to that of Bourbon. Henry III being now
dead, Henry of Navarre, the Knight of the White Plume, ascended the throne by
succession. The French historians paint in glowing colors the manly grace of his
person, his feats of valor in the field, and his acts of statesmanship in the
cabinet. They pronounce him the greatest of their monarchs, and his reign the
most glorious in their annals. We must advance a little further into our subject
before we can explain the difficulty we feel in accepting this eulogium as fully
warranted.
Henry was born in the old Castle of Pau, in Bearn, and was
descended in a direct line from Robert, the sixth son of Saint Louis. The boy,
the instant of his birth, was carried to his grandfather, who rubbed his lips
with a clove of garlic, and made him drink a little wine; and the rearing begun
thus was continued in the same hardy fashion.
The young Henry lived on
the plainest food, and wore the homeliest dress; he differed little or nothing,
in these particulars, from the peasant boys who were his associates in his hours
of play. His delight was to climb the great rocks of the Pyrenees around his
birth-place, and in these sports he hardened his constitution, familiarized
himself with peril and toil, and nurtured that love of adventure which
characterized him all his days. But especially was his education attended to. It
was conducted under the eye of his mother, one of the first women of her age, or
indeed of any age. He was carefully instructed in the doctrines of
Protestantism, that in after-life his religion might be not an ancestral
tradition, but a living faith. In the example of his mother he had a pattern of
the loftiest virtue. Her prayers seemed the sacred pledges that the virtues of
the mother would flourish in the son, and that after she was gone he would
follow with the same devotion, and defend with a yet stronger arm, the cause for
which she had lived. As Henry grew up he displayed a character in many points
corresponding to these advantages of birth and training. To a robust and manly
frame he added a vigorous mind. His judgment was sound, his wit was quick, his
resource was ready. In disposition he was brave, generous, confiding. He
despised danger; he courted toil; he was fired with the love of glory. But with
these great qualities he blended an inconvenient waywardness, and a decided
inclination to sensual pleasures.
The king had breathed his last but a
few moments, when Henry entered the royal apartment to receive the homage of the
lords who were there in waiting. The Huguenot chiefs readily hailed him as their
sovereign, but the Roman Catholic lords demanded, beware swearing the oath of
allegiance, that he should declare himself of the communion of the Church of
Rome. "Would it be more agreeable to you," asked Henry of those who were
demanding of him a renunciation of his Protestantism upon the spot, "Would it be
more agreeable to you to have a godless king? Could you confide in the faith of
an atheist?And in the day of battle would it add to your courage to think that
you followed the banner of a perjured apostate?"
Brave words spoken like
a man who had made up his mind to ascend the throne with a good conscience or
not at all. But these words were not followed up by a conduct equally brave and
high-principled. The Roman Catholic lords were obstinate. Henry's difficulties
increased. The dissentients were withdrawing from his camp; his army was melting
away, and every new day appeared to be putting the throne beyond his reach. Now
was the crisis of his fate. Had Henry of Navarre esteemed the reproach of being
a Huguenot greater riches than the crown of France, he would have worn that
crown, and worn it with honor. His mother's God, who, by a marvellous course of
Providence, had brought him to the foot of the throne, was able to place him
upon it, had he had faith in him. But Henry's faith began to fail. He
temporized. He neither renounced Protestantism nor emhraced Romanism, but aimed
at being both Protestant and Romanist at once. He concluded an arrangement with
the Roman Catholics, the main stipulation in which was that he would submit to a
six months' instruction in the two creeds — just as if he were or could be in
doubt—and at the end of that period he would make his choice, and his subjects
would then know whether they had a Protestant or a Roman Catholic for their
sovereign. Henry, doubtless, deemed his policy a masterly one; but his mother
would not have adopted it. She had risked her kingdom for her religion, and God
gave her back her kingdom after it was as good as lost. What the son risked was
his religion, that he might secure his throne. The throne he did secure in the
first instance, but at the cost of losing in the end all that made it worth
having. "There is a way that seemeth right in a man's own eyes, but the end
thereof is death."
Henry had tided over the initial difficulty, but at
what a cost! — a virtual betrayal of his great cause. Was his way now smooth?
The Roman Catholics he had not really conciliated, and the Protestants stood in
doubt of him. He had two manner of peoples around his standard, but neither was
enthusiastic in his support, nor could strike other than feeble blows. He had
assumed the crown, but had to conquer the kingdom. The League, whose soldiers
were in possession of Paris, still held out against him. To have gained the
capital and displayed his standard on its walls would have been a great matter,
but with an army dwindled down to a few thousands, and the Roman Catholic
portion but half-hearted in his cause, Henry dared not venture on the siege of
Paris. Making up his mind to go without the prestige of the capital meanwhile,
he retreated with his little host into Normandy, the army of the League in
overwhelming numbers pressing on his steps and hemming him in, so that he was
compelled to give battle to them in the neighborhood of Dieppe. Here, with the
waters of the English Channel behind him, into which the foe hoped to drive him,
God wrought a great deliverance for him. With only 6,000 soldiers, Henry
discomfited the entire army of the League, 30,000 strong, and won a great
victory. This affair brought substantial advantages to Henry. It added to his
renown in arms, already great. Soldiers began to flock to his standard, and he
now saw himself at the head of 20,000 men. Many of the provinces of France which
had hung back till this time recognized him as king. The Protestant States
abroad did the same thing; and thus strengthened, Henry led his army southward,
crossed the Loire, and took up his winter quarters at Tours, the old capital of
Clovis.
Early next spring (1590) the king was again in the field. Many of
the old Huguenot chiefs, who had left him when he entered into engagements with
the Roman Catholics, now returned, attracted by the vigor of his administration
and the success of his arms. With this accession he deemed himself strong enough
to take Paris, the possession of which would probably decide the contest. He
began his march upon the capital, but was met by the army of the League (March
14, 1590) on the plains of Ivry.
His opponents were in greatly superior
numbers, having been reinforced by Spanish auxiliaries and German reiter. Here a
second great victory crowned the cause of Henry of Navarre; in fact, the battle
of Ivry is one of the most brilliant on record. Before going into action, Henry
made a solemn appeal to Heaven touching the justice of his cause. "If thou
seest," said he, "that I shall be one of those kings whom thou givest in thine
anger, take from me my life and crown together, and may my blood be the last
that shall be shed in this quarrel." The battle was now to be joined, but first
the Huguenots kneeled in prayer. "They are begging for mercy," cried some one.
"No," it was answered, "they never fight so terribly as after they have prayed."
A few moments, and the soldiers arose, and Henry ad dressed some stirring words
to them. "Yonder," said he, as he fastened on his helmet, over which waved his
white plume, "Yonder is the enemy: here is your king. God is on our side. Should
you lose your standards in the battle, rally round my plume; you will always
find it on the path of victory and honor." Into the midst of the enemy advanced
that white plume; where raged the thickest of the fight, there was it seen to
wave, and thither did the soldiers follow. After a terrible combat of two hours,
the day declared decisively in favor of the king. The army of the League was
totally routed, and fled from the field, leaving its cannon and standards behind
it to become the trophies of the victors.[1]
This victory, won over great odds, was a second
lesson to Henry of the same import as the first. But he was trying to profess
two creeds, and "a double-minded man is unstable in all his ways." This fatal
instability caused Henry to falter when he was on the point of winning all. Had
he marched direct on Paris, the League, stunned by the blow he had just dealt
it, would have been easily crushed; the fall of the capital would have followed,
and, with Paris as the seat of his government, his cause would have been
completely triumphant. He hesitated—he halted; his enthusiasm seemed to have
spent itself on the battlefield. He had won a victory, but his indecision
permitted its fruits to escape him. All that year was spent in small affairs— in
the sieges of towns which contributed nothing to his main object. The League had
time to recruit itself. The Duke of Parma— the most illustrious general of the
age—came to its help. Henry's affairs made no progress; and thus the following
year (1591)was as uselessly spent as its predecessor. Meanwhile, the unhappy
country of France— divided into factions, traversed by armies, devastated by
battles—groaned uuder a combination of miseries. Henry's great qualities
remained with him; his bravery and dash were shown on many a bloody field;
victories crowded in upon him; fame gathered round the white plume;
nevertheless, his cause stood still. An eclipse seemed to rest upon the king,
and a Nemesis appeared to dog his triumphal car.
With a professed
Protestant upon the throne, one would have expected the condition of the
Huguenots to be greatly alleviated; but it was not so. The concessions which
might have been expected from even a Roman Catholic sovereign were withheld by
one who was professedly a Protestant. The Huguenots as yet had no legal security
for their civil and religious liberties. The laws denouncing confiscation and
death for the profession of the Protestant religion, re-enacted by Henry III,
remained unrepealed, and were at times put in force by country magistrates and
provincial Parliaments. It sometimes happened that while in the camp of the king
the Protestant worship was celebrated, a few leagues off the same worship was
forbidden to a Huguenot congregation under severe penalties. The celebrated
Mornay Duplessis well described the situation of the Protestants in these few
words: "They had the halter always about their necks." Stung by the temporizing
and heartless policy of Henry, the Huguenots proposed to disown him as their
chief, and to elect another protector of their Churches. Had they abandoned him,
his cause would have been ruined. To the Protestants the safety of the Reformed
faith was the first thing. To Henry the possession of the throne was the first
thing, and the Huguenots and their cause must wait. The question was, How
long?
It was now four years since Henry after a sort had been King of
France; but the peaceful possession of the throne was becoming less likely than
ever. Every day the difficulties around him, instead of diminishing, were
thickening. Even the success which had formerly attended his arms appeared to be
deserting him. Shorn of his locks, like Samson, he was winning brilliant
victories no longer. What was to be done? this had now come to be the question
with the king. Henry, to use a familiar expression, was "falling between two
stools." The time had come for him to declare himself, and say whether he was to
be a Roman Catholic, or whether he was to be a Protestant, There were not
wanting weighty reasons, as they seemed, why the king should be the former. The
bulk of his subjects were Roman Catholics, and by being of their religion he
would conciliate the majority, put an end to the wars between the two rival
parties, and relieve the country from all its troubles. By this step only could
he ever hope to make himself King of all France. So did many around him counsel.
His recantation would, to, a large extent, be a matter of form, and by that form
how many great ends of State would be served!
But on the other side there
were sacred memories which Henry could not erase, and deep convictions which he
could not smother. The instructions and prayers of a mother, the ripened beliefs
of a lifetime, the obligations he owed to the Protestants, all must have
presented themselves in opposition to the step he now meditated. Were all these
pledges to be profaned? were all these hallowed bonds to be rent asunder? With
the Huguenots how often had he deliberated in council; how often worshipped in
the same sanctuary; how often fought on the same battle-field; their arms mainly
it was that raised him to the throne; was he now to forsake them? Great must
have been the conflict in the mind of the king. But the fatal step had been
taken four years before, when, in the hope of disarming the hostility of the
Roman Catholic lords, he consented to receive instruction in the Romish faith.
To hesitate in a matter of this importance was to surrender—was to be lost; and
the choice which Henry now made is just the choice which it was to be expected
he would make. There is reason to fear that he had never felt the power of the
Gospel upon his heart. His hours of leisure were often spent in adulterous
pleasures. One of his mistresses was among the chief advisers of the step he was
now revolving. What good would this Huguenotism do him? Would he be so great a
fool as to sacrifice a kingdom for it? Listening to such counsels as these, he
laid his birth-right, where so many kings before and since have laid theirs, at
the feet of Rome.
It had been arranged that a conference composed of an
equal number of Roman Catholic bishops and Protestant pastors should be held,
and that the point of difference between the two Churches should be debated in
the presence of the king. This was simply a device to save appearances, for
Henry's mind was already made up. When the day came, the king forbade the
attendance of the Protestants, assigning as a reason that he would not put it in
the power of the bishops to say that they had vanquished them in the argument.
The king's conduct throughout was marked by consummate duplicity. He invited the
Reformed to fast, in prospect of the coming conference, and pray for a blessing
upon it; and only three months before his abjuration, he wrote to the pastors
assembled at Samur, saying that he would die rather than renounce his religion;
and when the conference was about to be held, we find him speaking of it to
Gabrielle d'Estrees, with whom he spent the soft hours of dalliance, as an
ecclesiastical tilt from which he expected no little amusement, and the
denouement of which was fixed already. "This morning I begin talking with the
bishops. On Sunday I am to take the perilous leap."[2]
Henry IV had the happiness to possess as counselors
two men of commanding talent. The first was the Baron Rosny, better known as the
illustrious Sully. He was a statesman of rare genius. Like Henry, he was a
Protestant; and he bore this further resemblance to his royal master, that his
Protestantism was purely political. The other, Mornay Duplessis, was the equal
of Sully in talent, but his superior in character. He was inflexibly upright.
These two men were much about the king at this hour; both felt the gravity of
the crisis, but differed widely in the advice which they gave.
"I can
find," said Sully, addressing the king, "but two ways out of your present
embarrassments. By the one you may pass through a million of difficulties,
fatigues, pains, perils, and labors. You must be always in the saddle; you must
always have the corselet on your back, the helmet on your head, and the sword in
your hand. Nay, what is more, farewell to repose, to pleasure, to love, to
mistresses, to games, to dogs, to hawking, to building; for you cannot come out
through these affairs but by a multitude of combats, taking of cities, great
victories, a great shedding of blood. Instead of all this, by the other way—that
is, changing your religion —you escape all those pains and difficulties in this
world," said the courtier with a smile, to which the king responded by a laugh:
"as for the other world, I cannot answer for that."
Mornay Duplessis
counseled after another fashion. The side at which Sully refused to look—the
other world—was the side which Duplessis mainly considered. He charged the king
to serve God with a good conscience; to keep Him before his eyes in all his
actions; to attempt the union of the kingdom by the Reformation of the Church,
and so to set an example to all Christendom and posterity. "With what
conscience," said he, "can I advise you to go to mass if I do not first go
myself? and what kind of religion can that be which is taken off as easily as
one's coat?" So did this great patriot and Christian advise.
But Henry
was only playing with both his counselors. His course was already irrevocably
taken; he had set his face towards Rome. On Thursday, July 22, 1593, he met the
bishops, with whom he was to confer on the points of difference between the two
religions. With a half-malicious humor he would occasionally interrupt their
harangues with a few puzzling questions. On the following Sunday morning, the
25th, he repaired with a sumptuous following of men-at-arms to the Church of St.
Denis. On the king's knocking the cathedral door was immediately
opened.
The Bishop of Bourges met him at the head of a train of prelates
and priests, and demanded to know the errand on which the king had come. Henry
made answer, "To be admitted into the Church of Rome." He was straightway led to
the altar, and kneeling on its steps, he swore to live and die in the Romish
faith. The organ pealed, the cannon thundered, the warriors that thronged nave
and aisle clashed their arms; high mass was performed, the king, as he partook,
bowing down till his brow touched the floor; and a solemn Te Deum concluded and
crowned this grand jubilation.[3]
The abjuration of Henry was viewed by the Pro
testants with mingled sorrow, astonishment, and apprehension. The son of Jeanne
d'Albret, the foremost of the Huguenot chiefs, the Knight of the White Plume, to
renounce his faith and go to mass! How fallen! But Protestantism could survive
apostasies as well as defeats on the battle-field; and the Huguenots felt that
they must look higher than the throne of Henry IV, and trusting in God, they
took measures for the protection and advancement of their great cause. From
their former compatriot and co-religionist, ever since, by the help of their
arms, he had come to the throne, they had received little save promises. Their
religion was proscribed, their worship was in many instances forbidden, their
children were often compulsorily educated in the Romish faith, their last wills
made void, and even their corpses dug out of the grave and thrown like carrion
on the fields. When they craved redress, they were bidden be patient till Henry
should be stronger on the throne. His apostasy had brought matters to a head,
and convinced the Huguenots that they must look to themselves. The bishops had
made Henry swear, "I will endeavor to the utmost of my power, and in good faith,
to drive out of my jurisdiction, and from the lands under my sway, all heretics
denounced by the Church." Thus the sword was again hung over their heads; and
can we blame them if now they formed themselves into a political organization,
with a General Council, or Parliament, which met every year to concert measures
of safety, promote unity of action, and keep watch over the affairs of the
general body? To Henry's honor it must be acknowledged that he secretly
encouraged this Protestant League. An apostate, he yet escaped the infamy of the
persecutor.
The Huguenot council applied to Henry's government for the
redress of their wrongs, and the restoration of Protestant rights and
privileges. Four years passed away in these negotiations, which often
degenerated into acrimonious disputes, and the course of which was marked (1595)
by an atrocious massacre—a repetition, in short, of the affair at Vassy. At
length Henry, sore pressed in his war with Spain, and much needing the swords of
the Huguenots, granted an edict in their favor, styled, from the town from which
it was issued, the Edict of Nantes, which was the glory of his reign. It was a
tardy concession to justice, and a late response to complaints long and most
touchingly urged. "And yet, sire," so their remonstrances ran, "among us we have
neither Jacobins nor Jesuits who aim at your life, nor Leagues who aim at your
crown. We have never presented the points of our swords instead of petitions. We
are paid with considerations of State policy. It is not time yet, we are told,
grant us an edict,—yet, O merciful God, after thirty-five years of persecution,
ten years of banishment by the edicts of the League, eight years of the present
king's reign, and four of persecutions. We ask your majesty for an edict by
which we may enjoy that which is common to all your subjects. The glory of God
alone, liberty of conscience, repose to the State, security for our lives and
property—this is the summit of our wishes, and the end of our
requests."
The king still thought to temporize; but new successes on the
part of the Spaniards admonished him that he had done so too long, and that the
policy of delay was exhausted. The League hailed the Spanish advances, and the
throne which Henry had secured by his abjuration he must save by Protestant
swords. Accordingly, on the 15th April, 1598, was this famous decree, the Edict
of Nantes, styled "perpetual and irrevocable," issued.
"This Magna
CAarta," says Felice, "of the French Reformation, under the ancient regime,
granted the following concessions in brief:—Full liberty of conscience to all;
the public exercise of the 'religion' in all those places in which it was
established in 1577, and in the suburbs of cities; permission to the lords' high
justiciary to celebrate Divine worship in their castles, and to the inferior
gentry to admit thirty persons to their domestic worship; admission of the
Reformed to office in the State, their children to be received into the schools,
their sick into the hospitals, and their poor to share in the alms; and the
concession of a right to print their books in certain cities." This edict
further provided for the erection of courts composed of an equal number of
Protestants and Roman Catholics for the protection of Protestant interests, four
Protestant colleges or institutions, and the right of holding a National Synod,
according to the rules of the Reformed faith, once every three years.[4] The State was charged with the duty of providing the
salaries of the Protestant ministers and rectors, and a sum of 165,000 livres of
those times (495,000 francs of the present day) was appropriated to that
purpose. The edict does not come fully up to our idea of liberty of conscience,
but it was a liberal measure for the time. As a guarantee it put 200 towns into
the hands of the Protestants. It was the Edict of Nantes much more than the
abjuration of Henry which conciliated the two parties in the kingdom, and gave
him the peaceful possession of the throne during the few years he was yet to
occupy it.
The signing of this edict inaugurated an era of tranquillity
and great prosperity to France. The twelve years that followed are perhaps the
most glorious in the annals of that country since the opening of the sixteenth
century. Spain immediately offered terms of peace, and France, weary of civil
war, sheathed the sword with joy.
Now that Henry had rest from war, he
gave himself to the not less glorious and more fruitful labors of peace. France
in all departments of her organization was in a state of frightful disorder—was,
in fact, on the verge of ruin. Castles burned to the ground, cities half in
ruins, lands reverting into a desert, roads unused, marts and harbors forsaken,
were the melancholy memorials which presented themselves to one's eye wherever
one journeyed. The national exchequer was empty; the inhabitants were becoming
few, for those who should have enriched their country with their labor, or
adorned it with their intellect, were watering its soil with their blood. Some
two millions of lives had perished since the breaking out of the civil wars.
Summoning all his powers, Henry set himself to repair this vast ruin. In this
arduous labor he displayed talents of a higher order and a more valuable kind
than any he had shown in war, and proved himself not less great as a statesman
than he was as a soldier. There was a debt of three hundred millions of francs
pressing on the kingdom. The annual expenditure exceeded the revenue by upwards
of one hundred millions of francs. The taxes paid by the people amounted to two
hundred millions of francs; but, owing to the abuses of collection, not more
than thirty millions found their way into the treasury. Calling Sully to his
aid, the king set himself to grapple with these gigantic evils, and displayed in
the cabinet no less fertility of resource and comprehensiveness of genius than
in the field. He cleared off the national debt in ten years. He found means of
making the income not only balance the expenditure, but of exceeding it by many
millions. He accomplished all this without adding to the burdens of the people.
He understood the springs of the nation's prosperity, and taught them to flow
again. He encouraged agriculture, promoted industry and commerce, constructed
roads, bridges, and canals. The lands were tilled, herds were reared, the
silkworm was introduced, the ports were opened for the free export of corn and
wine, commercial treaties were framed with foreign countries; and France, during
these ten years, showed as conclusively as it did after the war of 1870-71, how
speedily it can recover from the effects of the most terrible disasters, when
the passions of its children permit the boundless resources which nature has
stored up in its soil and climate to develop themselves.
IIenry's views
in the field of foreign politics were equally comprehensive. He clearly saw that
the great menace to the peace of Europe, and the independence of its several
nations, was the Austrian power in its two branches — the German and Spanish.
Philip II was dead; Spain was waning; nevertheless that ambitious Power waited
an opportunity to employ the one half of Christendom of which she was still
mistress, in crushing the other half. Henry's project, formed in concert with
Elizabeth of England, for humbling that Power was a vast one, and he had made
such progress in it that twenty European States had promised to take part in the
campaign which Henry was to lead against Austria. The moment for launching that
great force was come, and Henry's contingent had been sent off, and was already
on German soil. He was to follow his soldiers in a few days and open the
campaign. But this deliverance for Christendom he was fated not to achieve. His
queen, Marie de Medici, to whom he was recently married, importuned him for a
public coronation, and Henry resolved to gratify her. The ceremony, which was
gone about with great splendor, was over, and he was now ready to set out, when
a melancholy seized him, which he could neither account for nor shake off. This
pensiveness was all the more remarkable that his disposition was naturally gay
and sprightly. In the words of Schiller, in his drama of "Wallenstein"—
When the coming
campaign was referred to, he told the queen and the nobles of his court that
Germany he would never see—that he would die soon, and in a carriage. They tried
to laugh away these gloomy fancies, as they accounted them. "Go to Germany
instantly," said his minister, Sully, "and go on horseback." The 19th of May,
1610, was fixed for the departure of the king. On the 16th, Henry was so
distressed as to move the compassion of his attendants. After dinner he retired
to his cabinet, but could not write; he threw himself on his bed, but could not
sleep. He was overheard in prayer. He asked, "What o'clock is it?" and was
answered, "Four of the afternoon. Would not your Majesty be the better of a
little fresh air?" The king ordered his carriage, and, kissing the queen, he set
out, accompanied by two of his nobles, to go to the arsenal.[5]
He was talking with one of them, the Duke
d'Epernon, his left hand resting upon the shoulder of the other, and thus
leaving his side exposed. The carriage, after traversing the Rue St. Honore,
turned into the narrow Rue de la Ferroniere, where it was met by a cart, which
compelled it to pass at a slow pace, close to the kerbstone. A monk, Francois
Ravaillac, who had followed the royal cortege unobserved, stole up, and mounting
on the wheel, and leaning over the carriage, struck his knife into the side of
Henry, which it only grazed. The monk struck again, and this time the dagger
took the direction of the heart. The king fell forward in his carriage, and
uttered a low cry. "What is the matter, sire?" asked one of his lords. "It is
nothing," replied the king twice, but the second time so low as to be barely
audible. Dark blood began to ooze from the wound, and also from the mouth. The
carriage was instantly turned in the direction of the Louvre. As he was being
carried into the palace, Sieur de Cerisy raised his head; his eyes moved, but he
spoke not. The king closed his eyes to open them not again any more. He was
carried upstairs, and laid on his bed in his closet, where he expired.[6]
Ravaillac made no attempt to escape: he stood with
his bloody knife in his hand till he was apprehended; and when brought before
his judges and subjected to the torture he justified the deed, saying that the
king was too favorable to heretics, and that he purposed making war on the Pope,
which was to make war on God.[7] Years before, Rome had launched her excommunication
against the "two Henries," and now both had fallen by her dagger.
On the
character of Henry IV we cannot dwell. It was a combination of great qualities
and great faults. He was a brave soldier and an able ruler; but we must not
confound military brilliance or political genius with moral greatness. Entire
devotion to a noble cause the corner-stone of greatness — he lacked. France—in
other words, the glory and dominion of himself and house—was the supreme aim and
end of all his toils, talents, and manueuverings. The great error of his life
was his abjuration. The Roman Catholics it did not conciliate, and the
Protestants it alienated. It was the Edict of Nantes that made him strong, and
gave to France almost the only ten years of real prosperity and glory which it
has seen since the reign of Francis I. Had Henry nobly resolved to ascend the
throne with a good conscience, or not at all had he not paltered with the
Jesuits—had he said, "I will give toleration to all, but will myself abide in
the faith my mother taught me"—his own heart would have been stronger, his life
purer, his course less vacillating and halting; the Huguenots, the flower of
French valor and intelligence, would have rallied round him and borne him to the
throne, and kept him on it, in spite of all his enemies. On what different
foundations would his throne in that case have rested, and what a different
glory would have encircled his memory! He set up a throne by abjuration in 1593,
to be cast down on the scaffold of 1793!
We have traced the great drama
of the sixteenth century to its culmination, first in Germany, and next in
Geneva and France, and we now propose to follow it to its new stage in other
countries of Europe.
Book 18 Index
FOOTNOTES
VOLUME SECOND
BOOK SEVENTEENTH
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 1
[1] Millot, Elements of History, volume 4, p. 317; Lond., 1779.
[2] Felice, History of the Protestants of France, volume 1, p. 61; Lond., 1853.
[3] Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 45.
[4] Ibid., volume 1, p. 44.
[5] Millot, volume 4, pp. 317,318.
[6] Abbe Anquetil, Histoire de France, Tom. 3, pp. 246—249; Paris. 1835.
[7] Sleidan, book 19, p. 429. Beza, Hist. Ecclesiastes des Eglises Reformdes du Royaume de France, livr. 1, p. 30; Lille, 1841. Laval, Hist. of the Reformation in France, volume 1, book 1, page 55; Lond., 1737.
[8] Davila, Historia delle Guerre Civili di Francia, livr. 1, p. 9; Lyons, 1641. Maimbourg, Hist. de Calvinisme, livr. 2, p. 118; Paris, 1682.
[9] Davila, p. 14.
[10] Laval, volume 1, pp. 70,71.
[11] Thaunus, Hist., lib. 3. Laval, volume 1, p. 71.
[12] Davila, lib.1, pp. 13,14.
[13] Laval, volume 1, p. 73.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 2
[1] Laval, volume 1, p. 73.
[2] Beza. tom. 1, livr. 2, p. 50.
[3] Beza, tom. 1, livr. 2, p. 51. Laval, volume 1, p. 76.
[4] Laval, volume 1, p. 78.
[5] Beza, tom. 1, pp. 51,52.
[6] Ibid, tom. 1, p. 52.
[7] Maimbourg, Hist. Calv., livr. 2, p. 94; Paris, 1682.
[8] Ibid., livr. 2, pp. 94,95. Laval, volume 1, p. 80.
[9] Laval, volume 1, p. 81.
[10] Laval, volume 1, p. 82. Beza, tom. 1, p. 59.
[11] Beza, tom. 1, p. 59.
[12] Maimbourg, 1ivr. 2, p. 95.
[13] Beza, tom. 1, pp. 62-64.
[14] Laval, volume 1, pp. 83,84.
[15] Beza, tom. 1, p. 72. Laval, volume 1, pp. 85,86
[16] Havila, Hist. delle Guerre Civili di Francia, lib. 1, p. 13.
[17] Laval, volume 2, p. 107.
[18] Mezeray. Abr. Chr., tom. 4, p. 720. Laval, volume 1, p. 107.
[19] Lava1, volume 1, pp. 109,110.
[20] Beza, tom. 1, pp. 122,123.
[21] Daytin, lib. 1, pp. 17,18. Laval, volume 1, p. 142.
[22] Beza, tom. 1, p. 124.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 3
[1] Flor. de Reemond, Hist. de la Naissance, etc., de l’Heresie de ce Siecle, lib. 7, p. 931.
[2] Flor. de Raemond, lib. 7, p. 864.
[3] Beta, tom. 1, p. 124.
[4] Laval, volume 1, p. 146. Beza, tom. i., p. 125.
[5] Beza, tom. 1, p. 135.
[6] Beza, tom. 1, p. 108.
[7] Lava,l, volume 1, p. 149.
[8] Laval, volume 1, pp. 150-152—ex Vincent, Recherchos sur les Commencements de la Ref a< la Rochelle.
[9] Beza, tom. 1, p. 109.
[10] Felice, volume 1, p. 70.
[11] Beza, tom. 1, pp. 109-118. Laval, volume 1, pp. 118-132.
[12] Beza, tom. 1, pp. 118-121. Laval, volume 1, pp. 132-139.
[13] Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, Introduction, 5, 6; Lond., 1692.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 4
[1] Davilaj Hist. del. Guer. Civ. Franc., p. 20.
[2] Davila, p. 19.
[3] Davila, pp. 7,8.
[4] Maimbourg, livr. 2, p. 123. Laval, volume 1, p. 170.
[5] Ibid., livr. 2, p. 124. Laval, volume 1, p. 171.
[6] Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 83.
[7] Brantome, tom. 3, p. 204.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 5
[1] Beza, livr. 3, p. 133.
[2] Maimbourg, livr. 2, p. 121.
[3] Beza, livr. 3, p. 156. Laval, volume 1, pp. 176-181.
[4] Laval, volume 1, pp. 194,195.
[5] Laval, volume 1, pp. 193,194.
[6] Felice, volume 1, p. 91.
[7] Beza, livr. 1, p. 145.
[8] Ibid., livr. 1, p. 146. Laval, volume 1, p. 198.
[9] Beza, livr. 1, p. 147.
[10] Laval, volume 1, p. 200. Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 91.
[11] Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 91.
[12] Davila, livr. 1, p. 33. With Davila on this point agree Pasquier, De Thou, and D’Aubigne.
[13] Bungener, Calvin’s Life, etc., p. 304; Calvin’s Letters, 4. 107.
[14] Davila, livr. 1, p. 35.
[15] Ibid., livr. 1, p. 36. Laval, volume 1, p. 223.
[16] Laval, volume 1, p. 222.
[17] Laval, volume 1, p. 226.
[18] Guizot, volume 3, pp. 302,303.
[19] Laval, volume 1, p. 234. Davila, lib. 1, p. 40.
[20] Beza, livr. 3, pp. 162-166. Laval, volume 1, p. 236.
[21] Revelation 16.
[22] Beza, livr. 3, pp. 183,184.
[23] Davila, livr. 2, pp. 47,48.
[24] Beza, livr. 3, pp. 220-222.
[25] Laval, volume 1, pp. 318,319.
[26] Beza, livr. 3, p. 249.
[27] Laval, volume 1, p. 338.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 6
[1] The origin of this word has been much discussed and variously determined. In both France and Geneva the Protestants were called Huguenots. Laval tells us that each city in France had a word to denominate a bugbear, or hobgoblin. At Tours they had their King Hugo, who used, they said, every night to ride through the uninhabited places within and without the walls, and carry off those he met. And as the Protestants of Tours used to resort to these places at night to hold their meetings, they were here first of all in France called Huguenots. Beza, De Thou, and Pasquier agree in this etymology of the word. Others, and with more probability, derive it from the German word Eidgenossen, which the French corrupt into Eignots, and which signifies sworn confederates. It strengthens this supposition that the term was first of all applied to the sworn confederates of liberty in Geneva. Of this opinion are Maimbourg and Voltaire.
[2] See Laval, for report of the speeches in the States-General (volume 1, pp. 384-424).
[3] Laval, volume 1, p. 482.
[4] Ibid. volume 1, pp. 484,485.
[5] Fynes Moryson, Itinerary, part 1, p. 181: Lond., 1617.
[6] See very lengthened accounts of the debates and whole proceedings of this Conference in Beza’s Histoire des Eglises Reformees au Royaume de France, tom. 1, pp. 308-390; Lille, 1841; and Laval’s History of the Reformation in France, volume 1, pp. 482-587; Lond., 1737.
[7] The important part played by colporteurs in the evangelization of France is attested by an edict of Francis II, 1559, in which he attributes the troubles of his kingdom to “certain preachers from Geneva,” and also to “the malicious dispersion of condemned books brought from thence, which had infected those of the populace who, through want of knowledge and judgment, were unable to discern doctrines.” (Memoires de Conde, tom. 1, p. 9; Londres, 1743.)
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 7
[1] (Ewvres Completes de Bernard Palissy, par Paul-Antoine, Recepte Veritable, p. 108; Paris, 1844.
[2] Lava1, volume 1, p. 604.
[3] Davila, lib. 2, p. 78.
[4] Laval, volume 1, p. 623. Fe1ice, volume 1, pp. 139,140. Bayle, Dict., art. Hopital, note 45.
[5] Davila, lib. 2, p. 80. Felice, volume 2, p. 146.
[6] Laval, volume 1, p. 625.
[7] Davila, lib. 3, p. 86.
[8] Crespin, Hist. des Martyrs, livr. 8, p. 615; Geneve, 1619.
[9] Thaunus, Hist., lib. 29, p. 78.
[10] Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 151.
[11] Thaunus, Hist., lib. 29, p. 78.
[12] Crespin, livr., 8, p. 616.
[13] Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 153.
[14] Laval, volume 1, p. 34.
[15] Laval, volume 2, pp. 57,58.
[16] Felice, volume 1, pp. 174-176.
[17] Laval, volume 2, p. 42.
[18] Memoires de Conde, tom. 1, p. 89.
[19] Felice, volume 1, p. 163.
[20] Ibid.
[21] The terrible array of these edicts and outrages may be seen in Memoires de Conde, tom. 1, pp. 70-100.
[22] Agrippa d’Aubigne, Univ. Hist., tom. 1, lib. 3, cap. 2.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 8
[1] Laval, volume 2. p. 49.
[2] Memoirs of Castlenau; Le Labereaur’s Additions-apud Laval, volume 2, pp. 59-64.
[3] Gaberel, Histoire de l’Eglise de Geneve, tom. 1, pp. 352-354.
[4] Laval, volume 1, p. 64.
[5] Davila, lib. 3, p. 93. Mem. de Conde volume 3, pp. 222,319.
[6] Laval, volume 2, pp. 71,72.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 9
[1] Laval, volume 2, pp. 77,86.
[2] It is a curious fact that the Franco-German war of 1870 divided France almost exactly as the first Huguenot war had done. The Loire became the boundary of the German conquests to the south, and the region of France beyond that river remained almost untouched by the German armies: the provinces that rallied round the Triumvirate in 1562, to fight the battle of Romanism, were exactly those that bore the brunt of the German arms in the campaign of 1870.
[3] Felice, volume 1, p. 161.
[4] Ibid. p. 162. Laval, volume 2, pp. 114,115.
[5] Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 172.
[6] Davila, lib. 3, p. 105.
[7] Laval, volume 2, p. 171.
[8] Mem. de Conde, tom. 1, p. 97.
[9] Laval, volume 2, p. 194. Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 165.
[10] Laval, volume 2, p. 182.
[11] Brantome, volume 3, p. 112. Laval,volume 2, p. 221. Brown-ing, Hist. of the Huguenots, volume 1, p. 151; Lond., 1829.
[12] Laval, volume 2, p. 225.
[13] Ibid., volume 2, p. 224. Guizot, volume 3, p. 335.
[14] Laval, volume 2, p. 234.
[15] Felice, volume 1, p. 166.
[16] Laval, volume 2, pp. 237, 238.
[17] Mem. de Conde, tom. 1, p. 125.
[18] Guizot, volume 3, p. 339.
[19] Thaun., Hist., lib. 34, p. 234. Laval, volume 2, p. 235.
[20] Laval, volume 2, p. 255.
[21] Fe1ice, volume 1. p. 169.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 10
[1] Davila, lib. 3, p. 147.
[2] This chateau has a special and dreadful interest, and as the Author had an opportunity on his way to Spain, in 1869, to examine it, he may here be permitted to sketch the appearance of its exterior. It is situated on a low mound immediately adjoining the city ramparts, hard by the little harbor on which it looks down. The basement storey is loopholed for cannon and musketry, and the upper part is simply a two-story house in the style of the French chateau of the period, with two rows of small windows, with their white jalousies, and a roof of rusty brown tiles. The front is ornamented with two terminating round towers: the whole edifice being what doubtless Holyrood Palace, Edinburgh, was in the days of Queen Mary Stuart—that is, a quadrangular building with a castellated front. The place is now a barrack, but the French sentinel at the gate kindly gives permission for the visitor to inspect the interior. It is a small paved court, having a well in the center, shaded by two tall trees, while portions of the wall are clothed with a vine and a few flowering shrubs. Such is the aspect of this old house, neglected now, and abandoned to the occupancy of soldiers, but which in its time has received many a crowned head, and whose chief claim to glory or infamy must lie in this—that it is linked for ever with one of the greatest crimes of an age of great crimes.
[3] De Thou, livr. 37 (volume 5, p. 35).
[4] Davila, lib. 3, p. 145.
[5] Ibid., lib. 3, p. 146.
[6] Mem. de Tavannes, p. 282.
[7] Maimbourg, Hist. du Calvinisme, livr. 5, p. 354.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 11
[1] Davila, lib. 4, p. 168.
[2] Ibid, lib. 4, pp. 173-175. Mezeray, tom. 5, p. 104.
[3] Vie de Coliqny, p. 346. Davila, lib. 4, p. 193. Guizot, tom. 3, p. 353.
[4] Davila, lib. 4, p. 196.
[5] Ibid., lib. 4, p. 211.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 12
[1] Davila, lib. 5, pp. 243,244.
[2] Fe1ice, volume 1, p. 193.
[3] Davila, lib. v., p. 253.
[4] Cominciarono ad adoporarsi le machine destinate nell’ animo del Re, e della Reina condurre nella fete i principali Ugonotti.” (Davila, lib. 5, p. 254.)
[5] Maimbourg, Hist. du Calvinisme, lib. 6, p. 453.
[6] Felice, volume 1, pp. 195,196.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 13
[1] Gaberel, volume 2, p. 311.
[2] De Vita et Rebus Gestis Pii V, Pont. Maz. Auctore Io Antonio Gabutio, Novariensi Presbytero Congregationis Clericorum Regularium S. Pauli. Lib. 1, p. 5; Rome, 1605.
[3] Ibid., lib. 1, p. 7.
[4] Ibid., lib. 1, p. 8.
[5] Gabutius, Vita Pii V, lib. 1, cap. 5.
[6] Ibid., lib. 6, cap. 13-17.
[7] Epp. Pii V a Goubau. The letters of Pius V were published at Antwerp in 1640, by Francis Goubau, Secretary to the Spanish Embassy at Rome.
[8] Epp. Pii V a Goubau. This letter is dated 28th March, 1569.
[9] “Ad internecionem usque.”
[10] “Deletis omnibus.”
[11] Edit. Goubau, livr. 3, p. 136.
[12] These letters are dated 13th April, 1569.
[13] Adriani (continuator of Guicciardini) drew his information from the Journal of Cosmo de Medici, who died in 1574. (Guizot, volume 3, p. 376.)
[14] Memoires de Tavannes, p. 282.
[15] Guizot, volume 3, p. 376. Noue, Discours Polit. et Milit., p. 65.
[16] Guizot, volume 3, pp. 376,377.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 14
[1] Davila, lib. 5, p. 254.
[2] Memoires de Sully, tom. 1, livr. 1, p. 28; Londres, 1752.
[3] Davila, lib. 5, p. 262.
[4] Davila, lib. 5, p. 266. Davila says that she died on the fourth day. Sully says, “le cinquieme jour de sa maladie,” and that the reputed poisoner was a Florentine named Rene. perfumer to the Queen-mother. (Memoires, tom. 1, livr. 1, p. 53.)
[5] Sully, tom. 1, livr. 1, p. 36.
[6] Guizot, volume 3, p. 380.
[7] Gabutius, Vita Pii V, lib. 4, cap. 10, p. 150; Romae, 1605.
[8] Lettr. d’Ossat a< Roma, 1599. Besides the letters of Cardinal d’Ossat, ambassador of Henry IV at Rome, which place the facts given in the text beyond all reasonable doubt, there is also the work of Camillo Capilupi, published at Rome in October, 1572, entitled, Lo Stratagema di Carolo IX, Re di Francia, contra gli Ugonotti rebelli di Dio et suoi: descritto dal Signor Camillo Capilupi. See also Mendham. Life of Pius V, pp. 184-187; Lond., 1832.
[9] Guizot, volume 3, p. 383.
[10] Sully, tom. 1, livr. 1, pp. 37,38.
[11] The Abbe Anquetil was the first, or among the first, to propound this theory of the massacre in the interests of the Church of Rome. He lays the blame entirely on Catherine, who was alarmed at the confidence her son placed in the admiral. The same theory has since been elaborately set forth by others, especially by the historian Lingard. The main evidence on which it rests is the statement of the Duke of Anjou to his physician Miron, on his journey to Poland, which first appeared in the Memoires d’Etat de Villeroy. That statement is exceedingly apocryphal. There is no proof that it ever was made by Anjou. The same is to be said of the reported conversation of Charles IX with his mother on their return from visiting Coligny. It is so improbable that we cannot believe it. Opposed to these we have the clear and decided testimony of all contemporary historians, Popish and Protestant, confirmed by a hundred facts. The interior mechanism of the plot is shrouded in mystery, but the result establishes premeditation. The several parts of this plan all coincide: each piece falls into its place, each actor does his part, and the one end aimed at is effected, so that we no more can doubt pre-arrangement than, to use Paley’s illustration, we can doubt design when we see a watch. If farther it is asked, Who is the arranger in this case? the argument of Cui bono? leaves only one answer possible.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 15
[1] Sully, tom. 1, livr. 1, p. 43.
[2] Gulzot, volume 3, p. 378.
[3] Margaret is thought to have had a preference for the young Duke of Guise.
[4] Platina, Vit. Sore. Pont., p. 300; Venetia, 1600. Both Platina and Gabutius have given us lives of Pius V; they are little else than a record of battles and bloodshed.
[5] Sully, tom. 1, livr. 1, p. 54.
[6] Brantome, volume 8, p. 184.
[7] Davila, lib. 5, p. 269.
[8] Maimbourg says that the former occupants were turned out to make room for the new-comers. (Hist. de Calvinisme, livr. 6, p. 469.)
[9] Davila, livr. 5, p. 270. Mezeray.
[10] Ag. d’Aubigne, Mem., p. 30.
[11] Maimbourg, Livr. 6, p. 471
[12] Davila, lib. 5, p. 271.
[13] Perefixe, Hist. de Henri le Grand — Brantome, volume 1, p. 261.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 16
[1] Maimbourg, livr. 6, p. 472.
[2] De Thou, livr. 52.
[3] Villeroy, volume 2, p. 88.
[4] Sully, Memoires. tom. 1, livr. 1, p. 62.
[5] Davila, Maimbourg, De Thou, and others, all agree in these facts.— “After having been subjected, in the course of three centuries, at one time to oblivion, and at others to diverse transferences, these sad relics of a great man, a great Christian, and a great patriot have been resting for the last two-and-twenty years in the very Castle of Chatillon-sur-Loing, his ancestors’ own domain having once more become the propertyof a relative of his family, the Duke of Luxembourg.” (Guizot, volume 3, p. 398; Lond., 1874.)
[6] Davila, lib. 5, pp. 272,273.
[7] Voltaire states in one of the notes to the Henriade, that he heard the Marquis de Tesse say that he had known an old man of ninety, who in his youth had acted as page to Charles IX, and Ioaded the carbine with which he shot his Protestant subjects.
[8] Maimbourg, livr. 6, p. 478. Brantome, livr. 9, p. 427.—The arquebus is preserved in the museum of the Louvre. Two hundred and twenty years after the St. Bartholomew, Mirabeau brought it out and pointed it at the throne of Louis XVI— “visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children.”
[9] Sully, tom. 1, livr,
[10] Maimtmurg, livr. 6, p. 485.
[11] Guizot, vol. 3, p. 405.
[12] Sully, livr. 1, p. 74. De Thou, livr. 52,55.
[13] Fenelon’s Despatches—apud Carte.
[14] Gaberel, tom. 2, pp, 321,322.
[15] McCrie, Life of Knox, vol. 2, p. 217.
[16] De Thou informs us that the Cardinal of Lorraine, at that time in Rome, gave the messenger a thousand gold crowns.
[17] Consiliorum ad rem datorum. The Author’s authority for this statement is a book in the Bodleian Library which contains an official account of the “Order of Solemn Procession made by the Sovereign Pontiff in the Eternal City of Rome, for the most happy destruction of the Huguenot party.” The book was printed “At Rome by the heirs of Antonio Blado, printers to the Chamber, 1572.”
[18] When the Author was in the Library of the Vatican a few years ago, he observed that the inscriptions below Vasari’s frescoes had been removed. Other travelers have observed the same thing. On that account, the Author has thought right to give them in the text.
[19] “Gaspar Coligny, the Admiral, is carried home wounded. In the Pontificate of Gregory XIII, 1572.”
[20] “The slaughter of Coligny and his companions.”
[21] “The king approves Coligny’s slaughter.”
[22] “The slaughter of the Huguenots, 1572.”—The group before the exterminating angel consists of six figures; of which two are dead warriors, the third is dying, the fourth is trying to make his escape, a woman in the background is holding up her hands in an attitude of horror, and a figure draped as a priest is looking on. The letters F.P. are probably the initials of the artist, Frederic Bonzagna, called “Parmanensis,” from his being a native of Parma.
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 17
[1] See Laval, vol. 3, pp. 479-481.
[2] Davila, lib. 5.
[3] Maimbourg, lib. 6, p. 489.
[4] Davila, lib, 5.
[5] EXPLANATION OF THE MEDALS.
1. St. Bartholomew Medal. (Described in text, p. 606.) 2. Hercules and the Hydra. Hercules, who represents Charles IX, says, Ne ferrum temnat simul ignibus obsto-viz., “If he does not fear the sword I will meet him with fire.” The hydra symbolises heresy, which, condemning the sword of justice, is to be assailed by war and the stake. 3. Hercules and the Columns. Hercules bore two columns plucked from the ground to be carried farther, even to the Indies; hence the words, Plus ultra—“Yet farther.” Hence the medal in honor of Charles IX with the motto, “He shall be greater than Hercules.” 4. Charles IX is seen on his throne; in his left hand the scepter of justice, in his right a sword twined round with palm, in sign of victory. Some heads and bodies lie at his feet. Around is the motto, “Valor against rebels.”
Copies of these medals are in the possession of C. P. Stewart, Esq, M.A., who has kindly permitted engravings to be made of them for this work.
[6] “Mourut de chagrin et de langueur en la fleur de son age.” (Maimbourg, lib. 6, p. 490.)
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 18
[1] Laval, vol. 4, p. 530.
[2] Inventaire des Meubles de Catherine de Medicis. Par Edmond Bonnaffe Pages 3,4. Paris, 1874. (From old MS. in Bib. Nationale.)
VOLUME SECOND- BOOK SEVENTEENTH- CHAPTER 19
[1] It is scarcely necessary to remind our readers that this battle formed the subject of Lord Macaulay’s well-known ballad-song of the Huguenots.
[2] “Le saut perilleux.” (Mem. de Sully, tom. 2, livr. 5, p. 234, footnote.)
[3] Mem. de Sully, tom. 2, livr. 5, p. 239.
[4] Mem. de Sully, tom. 3, livr. 10, pp. 204,353.
[5] P. de L’Estoile, apud Mem. de Sully, tom. 7, pp. 406,407.
[6] L’Estoile, Mathieu, Perefixe, etc.—apud Mem. de Sully, tom. 7, pp, 404-412. Malherbe, apud Guizot, vol. 3, pp. 623,624.
[7] Mem. de Sully, tom. 7, p. 418.